This study reviews and synthesizes empirical research literature focusing on the relationship between boards of directors and organizational effectiveness of U.S. hospitals. The study examines literature published in scholarly journals during the period of 1991-2017. Fifty-one empirical articles were identified that met the study's inclusion criteria. A framework from the corporate governance and nonprofit governance literature is used to classify the articles according to level of analysis (individual actors, governing bodies, organizations, and networks, alliances and multiorganizational initiatives) and focus of research (formal structure and behavioral dynamics-including informal structures and processes). Results are discussed, emerging trends are identified, and recommendations are made for future research.

No abstract

No abstract

Popular quality improvement tools such as Six Sigma (SS) claim to provide health care managers the opportunity to improve health care quality on the basis of sound methodology and data. However, it is unclear whether this quality improvement tool is being used correctly and improves health care quality. The authors conducted a comprehensive literature review to assess the correct use and implementation of SS and the empirical evidence demonstrating the relationship between SS and improved quality of care in health care organizations. The authors identified 310 articles on SS published in the last 15 years. However, only 55 were empirical peer-reviewed articles, 16 of which reported the correct use of SS. Only 7 of these articles included statistical analyses to test for significant changes in quality of care, and only 16 calculated defects per million opportunities or sigma level. This review demonstrates that there are significant gaps in the Six Sigma health care quality improvement literature and very weak evidence that Six Sigma is being used correctly to improve health care quality.