health systems agencies
در نشریات گروه پزشکی-
سابقه و هدف
تغییر بیمارستان از غیر آموزشی به آموزشی، از جمله تغییرات ساختاری است که در سال های اخیر رواج یافته است. این مطالعه با هدف بررسی و مقایسه فرایندهای کلیدی در تغییر کارکرد بیمارستان از غیرآموزشی به آموزشی، انجام پذیرفت.
مواد و روش هاپژوهش به صورت ترکیبی- کیفی، در دو گام به انجام رسید. گام اول با استفاده از تحلیل اسناد، تکنیک رای گیری متعدد، تدوین سناریو و ترسیم فرایند انجام شد. گام دوم به روش کیفی- مطالعه تطبیقی با استفاده از جداول استخراج داده انجام شد.
یافته هادر گام اول ابتدا 195 فرایند شناسایی و پس از اولویت بندی 19 فرایند انتخاب شد. سپس 67 سند به منظور دسته بندی محتوای مربوط به هرکدام از انواع بیمارستان های آموزشی و غیرآموزشی بررسی و ایستگاه های کاری و فلوچارت ها مقایسه گردید. هفت فرایند به دلیل اضافه شدن ماموریت آموزش و 12 فرایند که به واسطه تغییر کارکرد بیمارستان تقویت می شوند؛ شناسایی و ترسیم شد. تغییرات شامل حضور افراد جدید در فعالیت های بیمارستان و تغییر سطح ارتباطات بین فردی و گروهی؛ افزایش تعداد گام های اجرای فرایند و مضاعف شدن فرایندها، افزایش افراد مسئول انجام گام ها، بعضا افزایش دو برابری، می باشد. پیچیدگی فرایندهای آموزشی نتیجه دیگر مطالعه حاضر بود و هم چنین در برخی گام ها حضور همزمان دانشجویان و کادر درمان به سبب آموزش بالینی و در صورت لزوم انجام، اقدام درمانی با نظارت رخ خواهد داد.
استنتاجبا توجه به درگیر شدن افراد جدید و تغییر در تعداد و تنوع افراد مسئول، نگاه ویژه به مقاومت کارکنان و تعارض های احتمالی و ارتباطات فردی و گروهی ضروری می باشد. مضاعف و طولانی شدن فرایندها نیازمند توجه بیش از پیش به عملکرد بیمارستان، رضایتمندی بیمار و آموزش بالینی نیروی انسانی آینده است. حضور همزمان دانشجویان و کادر درمان، ضرورت افزایش نظارت و توجه به ایمنی بیمار و کیفیت را یادآور می سازد. دو فرایند کلیدی از مجموع فرایندهای بررسی شده مربوط به پذیرش و تعیین تکلیف بیمار است و لذا توجه به عنوان اولین نقطه تماس و کانال ارتباطی کلیدی در ارایه خدمات و جلوگیری از شکاف های کیفیتی و عملکردی ضرورت دارد.
کلید واژگان: فرایندهای کلیدی، بیمارستان آموزشی، بیمارستان دانشگاهی، نظام سلامتBackground and purposeThe transition of hospitals from non-teaching to teaching institutions has been increasing in recent years. This study aimed to investigate the key processes involved in this transition.
Materials and methodsThis research was conducted using a mixed-methods qualitative approach. The first step involveddocument analysis, the multiple voting technique, and scenario and process development. The second step employed a comparative qualitative study using data extraction tables.
ResultsIn the first step, 195 processes were identified, and after prioritization, 19 were selected. Then, 67 documents were reviewed to categorize the content related to each type of hospital. Workstations and flowcharts were compared, leading to the identification and mapping of seven new processes introduced by the addition of the teaching mission, as well as the strengthening of 12 existing processes. The changes include the involvement of new personnel in activities, an increase in the number of process steps and processes, and a greater number of individuals responsible for executing these steps. Also, the complexity of teaching processes increases due to clinical training, requiring the simultaneous presence of students and medical staff.
ConclusionConsidering the involvement of new personnel and the changes in the number and variety of responsible individuals, special attention should be given to employee resistance, potential conflicts, and both individual and group communication. The doubling and prolonging of processes require careful consideration of hospital performance, patient satisfaction, and the clinical training of future healthcare professionals. The simultaneous presence of students and medical staff highlights the need for increased supervision and attention to patient safety and quality. Two key processes from the total reviewed processes are related to patient acceptance and assignment, making it crucial to focus on these as the first point of contact and key communication channels for providing services and preventing quality and performance gaps, based on the findings of this study.
Keywords: Processes, Teaching Hospitals, Systems Integration, Health Systems Agencies -
Background
In recent years, there have been many non-teaching hospitals that have become teaching hospitals. Although the decision to make this change is made at the policy level; But the unknown consequences can create many problems. The present study investigated the experiences of hospitals in changing the function of a non-teaching to a teaching hospital in Iran.
MethodsA Phenomenological qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 40 hospital managers and policy makers who had the experience of changing the function of hospitals in Iran through a purposive sampling in 2021. Thematic analysis using inductive approach and MAXQDA 10 was used for data analysis.
ResultsAccording to the results extracted 16 main categories and 91 subcategories. Considering the complexity and instability of command unity, understanding the change of organizational hierarchy, developing a mechanism to cover client’s costs, considering increase management team’ legal and social responsibility, coordinating policy demands with Providing resources, funding the teaching mission, organizing the multiple supervisory organizations, transparent communication between hospital and colleges, understanding the complexity of processes, considering change the performance appraisal system and pay for performance were the solutions for decrease problems of changing the function of non-teaching to teaching hospital.
ConclusionImportant matter about the improvement of university hospitals is evaluating the performance of hospitals to maintain their role as progressive actors in hospital network and also as the main actors of teaching future professional human resources. In fact, in the world, hospital becoming teaching is based on the performance of hospitals.
Keywords: teaching hospitals, Systems Integration, Health Systems Agencies, university hospitals -
Background
Hospitals, similar to other organizations, are complex social systems influenced by elements, such as staff, resources, and structures, that work to achieve specific goals. In terms of goals and missions, hospitals are divided into teaching and non-teaching categories. There are many differences in the nature and needs of these two types of hospitals that must be considered for proper operation by policymakers and managers.
ObjectivesThe present study compared issues between non-teaching and teaching hospitalsin Iran.
MethodsA qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews according to an interview guide with 40 Iranian hospital managers and policymakersselected through purposivesampling in 2021. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis with an inductive approach using the MAXQDA software (version 10).
ResultsAccording to the results, the main categoriesof differences between non-teaching and teaching hospitals in Iran were as follows: legal and social responsibility, cost-effectiveness and efficiency, supply of resources, empowerment of human capital, goals and missions, external and internal communications, revenue-cost management, organizational structure, customer satisfaction, organizational behavior, clinical and support departments, hospital processes, type and level of services, manpower, performance evaluation, and the organization of the teaching mission.
ConclusionPractical findings of this study include understanding the complexity and instability of command unity in teaching hospitals, understanding the differences in organizational hierarchy, developing a mechanism to cover costs for clients, increasing the legal and social responsibility of the management team, prioritizing organizational goals, coordinating policy demands with providing resources, funding the teaching mission, organizing multiple supervisory organizations, establishing transparent communication between hospitals and colleges, understanding the complexity of processes, considering the change of individual and group communication, changing the performance appraisal system, and paying for performance. It is suggested that policymakers consider these issues in providing the resources and facilities needed for hospitals based on their function.
Keywords: Health systems agencies, Systemsintegration, Teaching hospitals, University hospitals -
BACKGROUND
In terms of missions, hospitals are divided into teaching and nonteaching. In addition, differences in health‑care systems in countries will lead to differences in hospitals’ operation. Iran, as a specific health‑care system, is different from other countries. Hence, the present study investigated differences between teaching and nonteaching hospitals and their differences in Iran and the world.
MATERIALS AND METHODSA concurrent mixed‑methods study was conducted in two stages. The first stage was a narrative review of studies (2000–2020). Using narrative inquiry and reflective analysis, the content was analyzed and the categories were extracted. The second stage was a qualitative study conducted using semi‑structured interviews with forty Iranian hospital managers and policymakers through a purposive sampling in 2020. Content analysis was made using deductive approach, and MAXQDA 12 was used for data analysis.
RESULTSAccording to the first stage, categories were extracted as follows: service quality, type of cases, patient satisfaction, efficiency, performance indicators, patient safety, personnel, use of drugs, access to services, technologies, justice in the type of services received, using guidelines, processes, and number of services. In the second stage, 8 main categories, 17 categories, and 45 subcategories were extracted. The extracted main categories were as follows: mission and target, management and behavioral organizations, supply chain and chain of results, human resources, costs and budget, policy demands, clients’ satisfaction and patients’ right, and integration of medical education.
CONCLUSIONUnlike other countries, in Iran, the combination of missions and the complete dependence of teaching hospitals on the government has caused differences. Reducing the treatment mission of teaching hospitals; differences in the budget and development of its indicators; lower tariffs for teaching hospitals; developing a cost–income management model and supply chain; preventing uncertainty other than medical students except medicine; considering the clients’ right to choose hospital; and organizing research missions in hospitals were the solutions for decrease differences.
Keywords: Health systems agencies, systems integration, teaching hospitals, university hospitals
- نتایج بر اساس تاریخ انتشار مرتب شدهاند.
- کلیدواژه مورد نظر شما تنها در فیلد کلیدواژگان مقالات جستجو شدهاست. به منظور حذف نتایج غیر مرتبط، جستجو تنها در مقالات مجلاتی انجام شده که با مجله ماخذ هم موضوع هستند.
- در صورتی که میخواهید جستجو را در همه موضوعات و با شرایط دیگر تکرار کنید به صفحه جستجوی پیشرفته مجلات مراجعه کنید.