Healthcare administrators have sought to improve the quality of healthcare services by using organizational change as a lever. Unfortunately, evaluations of organizational change efforts in areas such as total quality management (TQM), continuous quality improvement (CQI), and organizational restructuring have indicated that these change programmes have not fulfilled their promise in improving service delivery. Furthermore, there are no easy answers as to why so many large-scale change programmes are unsuccessful. The aim of this analysis is to provide insights into practices that may be utilized to improve the chances of successful change management. It is proposed that in order to effect change, implementers must first gain commitment to the change. This is done by ensuring organizational readiness for change, surfacing dissatisfaction with the present state, communicating a clear vision of the proposed change, promoting participation in the change effort, and developing a clear and consistent communication plan. However gaining commitment is not enough. Many change programmes have been initially perceived as being successful but long-term success has been elusive. Therefore, maintaining commitment during the uncertainty associated with the transition period is imperative. This can be done by successfully managing the transition using action steps such as consolidating change using feedback mechanisms and making the change a permanent part of the organization's culture.

No abstract

We examined the costs of telehealth in Nova Scotia from a societal perspective. The clinical outcomes of telepsychiatry and teledermatology services were assumed to be similar to those for conventional face-to-face consultations. Cost information was obtained from the Nova Scotia Department of Health, the Canadian Institute for Health Information, and questionnaires to patients, physicians and telehealth coordinators. There were 215 questionnaires completed by patients, 135 by specialist physicians and eight by telehealth coordinators. Patient costs for a face-to-face consultation ranged from $240 to $1048 (all costs in Canadian dollars), whereas patient costs for telehealth were lower, from $17 to $70. However, from a societal perspective, the overall cost of providing face-to-face services was lower than for telehealth: the total costs for face-to-face services ranged from $325 to $1133, while the total costs for telehealth services ranged from $1736 to $28,084. A threshold analysis showed that, above a certain patient workload, telehealth services would be more cost-effective than face-to-face services from a societal perspective. This workload is attainable in Nova Scotia.

The term “physician engagement” is used quite frequently, yet it remains poorly defined and measured. The aim of this study is to clarify the term “physician engagement.” This study used an eight step-method for conducting concept analyses created by Walker and Avant. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched on February 14, 2019. No limitations were put on the searches with regard to year or language. Results identify that the term “physician engagement” is regular participation of physicians in (1) deciding how their work is done, (2) making suggestions for improvement, (3) goal setting, (4) planning, and (5) monitoring of their performance in activities targeted at the micro (patient), meso (organization), and/or macro (health system) levels. The antecedents of “physician engagement” include accountability, communication, incentives, interpersonal relations, and opportunity. The results include improved outcomes such as data quality, efficiency, innovation, job satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and performance. Defining physician engagement enables physicians and health care administrators to better appreciate and more accurately measure engagement and understand how to better engage physicians.

Health care providers are constantly striving to improve quality and efficiency by using performance management systems and quality improvement initiatives. Creating and maintaining a culture of accountability are important for achieving this end because accountability is the reason for measuring and improving performance. The keys to creating a culture of accountability will be explicated by examining the extant literature, and from this, 6 methods will be outlined for creating such a culture.

Interdisciplinary teams play a key role in the delivery of health care. Team functioning can positively or negatively impact the effective and efficient delivery of health care services as well as the personal well-being of group members. Additionally, teams must be able and willing to work together to achieve team goals within a climate that reflects commitment to team goals, accountability, respect, and trust. Not surprisingly, dysfunctional team functioning can limit the success of interdisciplinary health care teams. The first step in improving dysfunctional team function is to conduct an analysis based on criteria necessary for team success, and this article provides meaningful criteria for doing such an analysis. These are the following: a common team goal, the ability and willingness to work together to achieve team goals, decision making, communication, and team member relationships. High-functioning interdisciplinary teams must exhibit features of good team function in all key domains. If a team functions well in some domains and needs to improve in others, targeted strategies are described that can be used to improve team functioning.

Performance management is an important mechanism for ensuring accountability and improving the quality of health-care services. The last decade has witnessed a proliferation in the development of performance measurement systems for assessing health-care processes and outcomes at the program, hospital, district, system and national level. This has allowed for comparison and benchmarking between similar aspects of care at each of these levels. Unfortunately, most performance systems are devoid of clear mechanisms for translating feedback from measures into strategies for action, thus leaving largely unfulfilled the quality and management aspect necessary to improve health-care services. Therefore, the thinking that goes into designing these systems must change. This article outlines a management framework called systematic outcome mapping that provides for performance management rather than just performance measurement by allowing for quality improvement to be built into performance indicator development. It utilizes evidence-based medicine and expert consensus opinion to establish linkages between processes of care and their outcomes with the clear intent that feedback from information provided by performance indicators can be used to modify health-care activities so as to improve health outcomes. This fulfils the quality improvement aspect of performance measurement and makes it an integral part of a performance management framework that reinforces organizational learning through feedback from outcomes and the assessment of organizational routines.

Background/Objective Canada, like other industrialized countries, aims to provide safe healthcare to its citizens that meets the fiscal responsibilities of delivery in an efficient manner. This is evident from many initiatives across the world aimed at improving patient safety, such as the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's 100,000 Lives Campaign in the United States and the Safer Healthcare Now! initiative in Canada. A key component of improving patient safety is the prevention and management of medical error. Successful management of such errors and changes aimed at reducing the likelihood of their occurrence can have a significant impact on improving patient safety and quality of care, thereby resulting in fiscal benefits to the system. There is substantial evidence suggesting that medical errors are a leading cause of death and injury (Kohn et al. 1999). According to the Canadian Adverse Events Study, 7.5% of patients admitted to acute care hospitals in Canada during 2000 experienced an adverse event, with 36.