Quantifying culture gaps between physicians and managers in Dutch hospitals: a survey

Background: The demands in hospitals for safety and quality, combined with limitations in financing health care require effective cooperation between physicians and managers. The complex relationship between both groups has been described in literature. We aim to add a perspective to literature, by developing a questionnaire which provides an opportunity to quantitatively report and elaborate on the size and content of differences between physicians and managers. Insight gained from use of the questionnaire might enable us to reflect on these differences and could provide practical tools to improve cooperation between physicians and managers, with an aim to enhance hospital performance.\ud \ud Methods: The CG-Questionnaire was developed by adjusting, pre-testing, and shortening Kralewski's questionnaire, and appeared suitable to measure culture gaps. It was shortened by exploratory factor analysis, using principal-axis factoring extraction with Varimax rotation. The CG-Questionnaire was sent to all physicians and managers within 37 Dutch general hospitals. ANOVA and paired sample T-tests were used to determine significant differences between perceptions of daily work practices based in both professional cultures; culture gaps. The size and content of culture gaps were determined with descriptive statistics.\ud \ud Results: The total response (27%) consisted of 929 physicians and 310 managers. The Cronbachs alpha's were 0.70 - 0.79. Statistical analyses showed many differences; culture gaps were found in the present situation; they were even larger in the preferred situation. Differences between both groups can be classified into three categories: (1) culture gaps in the present situation and not in the preferred, (2) culture gaps in the preferred situation and not in the present, and (3) culture gaps in both situations.\ud \ud Conclusions: With data from the CG-Questionnaire it is now possible to measure the size and content of culture gaps between physicians and managers in hospitals. Results gained with the CG-Questionnaire enables hospitals to reflect on these differences. Combining the results, we distinguished three categories of increasing complexity. We linked these three categories to three methods from intergroup literature (enhanced information, contact and ultimately meta cognition) which could help to improve the cooperation between physicians and managers

Integrating teamwork, clinician occupational well-being and patient safety – development of a conceptual framework based on a systematic review

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that teamwork in hospitals is related to both patient outcomes and clinician occupational well-being. Furthermore, clinician well-being is associated with patient safety. Despite considerable research activity, few studies include all three concepts, and their interrelations have not yet been investigated systematically. To advance our understanding of these potentially complex interrelations we propose an integrative framework taking into account current evidence and research gaps identified in a systematic review. METHODS: We conducted a literature search in six major databases (Medline, PsycArticles, PsycInfo, Psyndex, ScienceDirect, and Web of Knowledge). Inclusion criteria were: peer reviewed papers published between January 2000 and June 2015 investigating a statistical relationship between at least two of the three concepts; teamwork, patient safety, and clinician occupational well-being in hospital settings, including practicing nurses and physicians. We assessed methodological quality using a standardized rating system and qualitatively appraised and extracted relevant data, such as instruments, analyses and outcomes. RESULTS: The 98 studies included in this review were highly diverse regarding quality, methodology and outcomes. We found support for the existence of independent associations between teamwork, clinician occupational well-being and patient safety. However, we identified several conceptual and methodological limitations. The main barrier to advancing our understanding of the causal relationships between teamwork, clinician well-being and patient safety is the lack of an integrative, theory-based, and methodologically thorough approach investigating the three concepts simultaneously and longitudinally. Based on psychological theory and our findings, we developed an integrative framework that addresses these limitations and proposes mechanisms by which these concepts might be linked. CONCLUSION: Knowledge about the mechanisms underlying the relationships between these concepts helps to identify avenues for future research, aimed at benefiting clinicians and patients by using the synergies between teamwork, clinician occupational well-being and patient safety. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1535-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Research Development in University Nursing Departments in South Africa: description of a research development model

In the field of research, nursing is in a catch-up mode and the need to rapidly develop the capacity to do research that addresses the health needs of the population is being addressed by university nursing schools in South Africa. The design and implementation of the research development programme intended to surmount this problem is described in this paper. The programme aimed at developing lead researchers within each nursing department to lead a research programme on a selected health topic. The focus was on the person as well as the department as the research platform. The lead researchers were assisted in developing a research team for their programme, in becoming part of an international network, working with a research mentor, in submitting proposals for external funding and preparing for NRF rating. This was done through a series of workshops and the appointment of a mentor for each lead researcher. The programme was successful in getting lead researchers to establish research teams in their own institutions, work with mentors and apply for external research funding

Nurses and Midwives as Global Partners to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals in the Anthropocene.

PURPOSE: To highlight ongoing and emergent roles of nurses and midwives in advancing the United Nations 17 Sustainable Development Goals by 2030 at the intersection of social and economic inequity, the climate crisis, interprofessional partnership building, and the rising status and visibility of the professions worldwide. DESIGN: Discussion paper. METHODS: Literature review. FINDINGS: Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals will require all nurses and midwives to leverage their roles and responsibility as advocates, leaders, clinicians, scholars, and full partners with multidisciplinary actors and sectors across health systems. CONCLUSIONS: Making measurable progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals is critical to human survival, as well as the survival of the planet. Nurses and midwives play an integral part of this agenda at local and global levels. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Nurses and midwives can integrate the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals into their everyday clinical work in various contexts and settings. With increased attention to social justice, environmental health, and partnership building, they can achieve exemplary clinical outcomes directly while contributing to the United Nations 2030 Agenda on a global scale and raising the profile of their professions