Journal of Healthcare Leadership最新文献

Background: Dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders are critical in determining the culture and success of Academic Medical Centers (AMCs). These dynamics are complex, making it challenging to develop effective means of improving these relationships. This study sought to characterize and compare relationships between clinicians and healthcare leaders at three AMCs to develop more effective means of improving healthcare organization cultures.

Materials and methods: The authors interviewed clinicians, clinician leaders, and operational leaders at three AMCs about their role, perceived dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders, and ideal leadership. Interviews continued until additional interviews stopped revealing new information at each organization, requiring a total of 92 participants (49% male, 54% clinicians, 22% clinician-leaders, 24% operational leaders). Interview transcripts were systematically analyzed based on constructivist grounded theory and content analysis for key themes.

Results and discussion: The perceived most pressing issues at each AMC varied across three key cultural levels: organization, department, and practice. When interventions targeted levels distinct from the level perceived most pressing, they tended to exacerbate existing issues and further undermine trust and engagement between clinicians and healthcare leaders. Clinicians and healthcare leaders across AMCs described similar traits of ideal leadership but exhibited different understandings of what those traits meant in application. Cultural dynamics were also challenged by professional cultural differences between the three groups and barriers such as differences in status, location, and background. Limitations of this study included its cross-sectional nature and potential sampling bias.

Conclusion: The level of organizational culture where the greatest tension exists between clinicians and healthcare leaders varies by three key levels. Discerning which level of organizational culture represents the greatest local opportunity can inform the design of more targeted interventions to improve dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders seeking to foster more constructive partnerships.

Solutions to healthcare's most persistent and pervasive challenges remain elusive because we approach them as navigating oppositional tensions: the need to drive efficiency versus improve quality, to leverage cutting-edge technology versus maintain human compassion, to address population health versus providing care to the patient in front of you. The key to transforming healthcare lies in the ability of healthcare leaders to recognize when oppositional tensions are in fact paradoxes at play, to increase the capability and collective capacity to navigate them. Paradox science contends sustainable solutions to intractable challenges come not from eliminating the tensions that operate within the complexity but from the ability of those involved to hold opposing ideas in productive balance. It empowers leaders and their teams to find innovative paths by engaging with tensions directly. This perspective piece outlines three steps healthcare leaders can take to apply paradox science in practice, providing descriptions and example actions for each: 1) Clarify the paradox, 2) Encourage experimentation, and 3) Adopt a dynamic view. Moving forward, health leaders must leverage paradox science to drive forward innovation agendas in order to truly transform the healthcare experience for patients, populations, and the health workforce that serves them.

Background: Tremendous achievements in healthcare and science over the past 200 years have enhanced life expectancy in parallel with a shift from dogma to humanistic liberal education. Advancements in cancer have included vaccines treating causes of cancer (eg, hepatitis C- induced liver cancer and human papillomavirus-induced cervical cancer) along with improved cancer survival in children. In contrast, developments in cancer, frequently touted as "discoveries" or "breakthroughs" in media headlines, have been demonstrated to be ephemeral rather than game changers. In reality, cancer incidences are increasing, and relapse and mortality rates have not changed substantially. By this, we are experiencing today similar challenges to those before the so-called Humboldt reform. The trend towards managerialism with a focus on quantity in health care and science endangers their integrity.

Methods: Due to the complexity of integrity of healthcare and science, in-depth contemplation of this review contains foundations of actions in healthcare and science, information regarding cancer, as an example, quantity focus of healthcare, technology, publishing, marketing and media, predatory publishers, followed by psychologic and sociologic aspects which influence our perception.

Results: A complex paradoxical transformation has occurred, in which quality and humanism have been replaced by quantity, revenue, and marketing, together with "citation silence", (ignoring original findings), and increased corruption and misconduct. This shift explains why the integrity of healthcare and science is being eroded.

Conclusion: Countries and societies are only as strong as their healthcare and science, both of which are only as strong as their emphasis on quality and integrity. Awareness of this situation may represent a first step toward a renewed focus on accountability.

Purpose: The objective of this study is to evaluate whether the nationwide establishment and institutionalization of a peer-support program, is economically justified given the potential positive effects on the Second Victim Phenomenon (SVP) among healthcare professionals in Germany.

Methods: A comprehensive methodological approach was employed, using data from the SeViD studies to assess the prevalence and duration of SVP among physicians and nurses in Germany. Economic impact assessments were conducted to estimate the potential cost savings associated with implementing a peer-support program.

Results: The economic analysis reveals significant annual costs associated with SVP-induced absenteeism: approximately 1.56 billion euros for physicians and 1.87 billion euros for nurses. Implementing comprehensive peer-support programs could reduce these costs to approximately 0.85 billion (physicians) and 1.02 billion euros (nurses), respectively, demonstrating substantial potential economic benefits.

Conclusion: Investing in a structured peer-support program could yield annual savings exceeding 1.55 billion euros while enhancing workforce resilience and improving patient care. This underscores the economic rationale for scaling up peer support initiatives in healthcare settings.

Introduction: The well-being of healthcare workers (HCWs) is a critical concern. While healthcare leaders can play a crucial role in influencing employees' well-being, it remains unclear how leaders are leveraging this influence. This study aims to unravel the current perspectives and practices of healthcare leaders in supporting HCW well-being.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare leaders at various levels within a university medical center. The interviews focused on exploring three key topics: factors influencing HCW well-being, data sources utilized for information gathering, and strategies leaders employ to influence HCW well-being. Our study design was grounded in constructionist epistemology and adopted a phenomenological approach. The methodology primarily involved a data driven, inductive thematic analysis to discern patterns and themes from the collected data.

Results: Fifteen interviews with healthcare leaders revealed a multitude of factors influencing HCW well-being, categorized into three domains: personal, socioeconomic, and work-related factors. Leaders reported a variety of data sources, including "contact data", data derived from regular and sporadic interpersonal interactions, and "investigation data", entailing formal inquiries conducted within the healthcare organization. Interestingly, while leaders acknowledge their potential to positively influence well-being, particularly in work-related aspects, there was a notable trend of deflecting responsibility, often redirecting it towards other leaders or placing it back on the individual employee.

Conclusion: Healthcare leaders show a comprehensive understanding of factors affecting employee well-being. However, healthcare leaders have a predominantly reactive approach to managing employees' well-being. Data collection is often sporadic, lacking consistency, and there is a tendency to redirect responsibility for well-being, revealing a discrepancy between acknowledgement of influence and its actual implementation. We argue that it is essential for leaders at all hierarchical levels to assume responsibility actively and collectively for employee well-being, transitioning to a proactive approach in promoting and safeguarding the well-being of HCWs.

Background: Nursing leadership is recognized as essential to fostering innovation in hospitals, while the precise relationship between them has yet to be established.

Aim: The objective of this study is to examine the association among leadership in nursing research, research motivation, perceived barriers, and innovation behavior of junior nurses who hold a master's degree or above in the hospital.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted and electronic questionnaires were distributed online. An online data analysis tool SPSSAU was adopted to conduct descriptive analysis, correlation analysis, and structural equation model construction. This study adhered to the STROBE guideline.

Results: A total of 1025 valid questionnaires were collected in this survey. The leadership in nursing research of head nurses affected nurses' innovation behavior via perceived barriers. The indirect effect accounted for 59.75% of the total response variance. Research motivation was identified as a moderator in the mediation model, revealing that leadership in nursing research did not significantly affect innovation behavior when nurses showed high motivation.

Conclusion: Leadership in nursing research of head nurses and research motivation of junior nurses with master's degree are crucial to enhancing nursing innovation behavior in the hospitals.

Background: The form of leadership that can positively influence nursing care performance and patient outcomes remains a crucial subject in the healthcare sector.

Aim: This study examines the effect of leadership style at different managerial levels on nursing care performance and patient outcomes.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a public hospital, focusing on two primary settings: the general ward and the critical care unit. The study sample included 60 nurses and 300 patients. The leadership style is a predictor of this study and was measured using a cross-sectional survey of Jordanian nurses using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). Nursing care performance and patient outcomes were measured by surveying patients, observing practice, and reviewing health records. The analysis involved descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, odds ratios, and multivariate regression analysis.

Results: The study found that transformational leadership was predominant in the general ward, while transactional leadership was more common in the critical care unit. Leadership styles significantly influence clinical nursing performance. Nurses under transformational leaders were more likely to follow generic policies like patient surveillance but less consistent with specific care standards. Nurses under transactional leaders were linked to higher adherence to standardized care protocols like fall risk assessment and medication rights. Patient outcomes were similar between units, except for higher readmission rates under transactional leadership.

Conclusion: The study's findings underscore the complexities of nurse leadership styles and clinical nursing performance. Nurse manager should adapt their leadership style to the particular setting and a one-size-fits-all approach to leadership may not be effective in healthcare.

Background: In many Indian states, public health programs are led by clinicians without formal training in leadership and management, limiting their effectiveness. To tackle this, Uttar Pradesh's Department of Medical, Health, and Family Welfare initiated a Public Health Management and Leadership (PHML) training program for the Level 4 (mid-career) medical officers. This program aims to enhance the leadership and management skills necessary for these officers to support them transitioning to administrative roles.

Methods: The training focused on essential competencies such as leadership, communication, team building, fiscal management, and public health problem-solving. It included in-person sessions and mentored practicum, utilizing experiential learning and problem-solving group projects. Kirkpatrick's model was used to evaluate participants' reactions, learning outcomes, and behavior change. Feedback was analyzed using descriptive statistics across 12 training domains, while pre- and post-training test scores were compared using paired t-tests in Stata 18 to measure learning improvements. Participant interviews provided additional insights.

Results: Participants reported high satisfaction with the learning environment and methods but faced challenges in applying management concepts, citing limited contextual input and faculty interaction. Learning outcomes showed moderate improvement, with average test scores rising from 53.3 to 59.6 (p = 0.003). They successfully applied a structured problem-solving framework in practicum projects and created action plans for public health challenges. Participants recommended adding topics on financing, procurement, human resources, and hospital management to support them in performing their core functions. Barriers to applying learned concepts included human resource constraints, limited autonomy, gender stereotypes, and lack of recognition.

Conclusion: Emphasizing leadership competencies, experiential learning, and mentored practicum holds promise. However, customizing the curriculum to UP's specific context, ensuring sufficient training time, focusing on core management functions, and addressing organizational barriers are vital. Integrating these recommendations into blended training that enhances core managerial skills and leadership development can strengthen workforce capabilities.

Introduction: Although the importance of leader-member relationships in teamwork is acknowledged in literature, a deeper understanding of this relationship is lacking, especially in rural areas. The impact of leader-member relationships on team outcomes is especially important in rural Chinese hospitals as improving teamwork forms a national health reform priority in these hospitals. This study investigates how leader-member relationships (ie leader-member perceived similarity and power distance orientation) influence team outcomes (ie perceived quality of care and job satisfaction) via speaking up and silence.

Methods: An online questionnaire was completed by 1017 team members (ie doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals) of 300 teams in four rural Chinese hospitals in October 2022. The questionnaire measured leader-member perceived similarity, power distance orientation, speaking up, silence, perceived quality of care, job satisfaction and control variables. Multilevel mediation analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses.

Results: Leader-member perceived similarity and power distance orientation are positively related to speaking up (β=0.61, p<0.01; β=0.17, p<0.01 respectively) and to silence (β=0.41, p<0.01; β=0.63, p<0.01 respectively). Speaking up is positively related to the perceived quality of care (β=0.24, p<0.01; β=0.46, p<0.01) and job satisfaction (β=0.30, p<0.01; β=0.54, p<0.01), while the impact of silence is not significant. Finally, speaking up mediates the associations of both leader-member perceived similarity and power distance orientation with perceived quality of care (β=0.15, p<0.01; β=0.08, p<0.01 respectively) and job satisfaction (β=0.30, p<0.01; β=0.54, p<0.01 respectively).

Conclusion: Speaking up, rather than silence, contributes to team functioning by mediating the impact of leader-member relationships to team outcomes. Hospital management may therefore seek to stimulate speaking up by focussing on leader-member relationships: increasing leader-member similarity and promoting members' power distance orientation. However, any unintended effect of increased silence through these leader-member relationships is an important area of future research, which can adopt multidimensional models of speaking up and silence.