Showing papers by "Rod Sheaff published in 2004"

Governmentality by Network in English Primary Healthcare

Abstract: In England, the quality of clinical work is being regulated in new ways following recent devel- opments in "clinical governance" policy and apparent failures in the previous system of medical self-regulation. Using multiple case studies, this paper examines how these changes are affecting professional governmentality and discipline in general practice. Formal organizational structures play little role in clinical governance there. Clinical quality is managed largely through semi- formal networks, relying on medical self-surveillance. Compliance is achieved largely by discursive appeals to the legitimacy of clinical governance, but local GPs' leaders also argue that governments might otherwise regulate medical practice more actively. As yet the effects of clinical governance activity on service delivery are slight. Professional self-regulation is replacing permissive exception management with more collegial, directive methods.

Soft governance and attitudes to clinical quality in English general practice

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: English primary care organisations (primary care groups and trusts - PCGs, PCTs) were, and are, responsible for the quality of general practice but lack hierarchical structures and, frequently, contractual relationships through which to influence it. The theory of soft governance describes how managers can influence professional practice by other means. This study examines the hypothesis that PCG/Ts have used 'soft' clinical governance. METHODS: Survey in 2000/01 of general practitioners' (GPs') attitudes, opinions and self-reported activity in six PCGs and six PCTs using a semi-structured mailed questionnaire. To assess how representative respondents were of English GPs generally, four questions from a national sample survey of English GPs were included and the results compared. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 437 (52%) GPs. They most often mentioned the technical aspects of clinical governance. Managerial, policy and resourcing implications were next most frequently mentioned, usually in unfavourable terms. Most GPs reported that their clinical practice had changed because of clinical governance activities, although nearly 40% also reported little difference in the quality of care provided. The National Service Framework for coronary heart disease influenced practice independently of PCG/T activities. CONCLUSION: English primary care organisations are exercising soft governance (although not by that name) over some but not all aspects of GPs' clinical practice. However, this soft governance is complex, not easy to sustain and appears hard to extend beyond essentially clinical domains.

Strategic preparation for crisis management in hospitals: empirical evidence from Egypt

Abstract: This study examines Egyptian managers' perceptions of their hospitals' preparation for crisis management. A total of 259 participants completed a 24‐item Strategic Preparation for Crisis Management (SPCM) instrument. The instrument was found to be valid and reliable in a non‐Western context. The study detected a positive relationship between long‐term strategy and crisis readiness. A significant statistical relationship was also found between external strategic orientation and crisis readiness. Finally, organizational complexity was found to be significantly and negatively associated with perceived crisis readiness.

A new role for the general practitioner? Reframing ‘inappropriate attenders’ to inappropriate services

Abstract: This qualitative study describes the impact of deploying general practitioners (GPs) as primary care physicians (PCPs) in three Accident and Emergency (A&E) departments in Greater Manchester as part of a Health Action Zone initiative to promote integration of systems of care more responsive to the needs of inner city population groups. The setting was three Accident and Emergency Units in Greater Manchester. Semi-structured interviews with the PCPs and key A & E staff (n = 32) before the PCPs were deployed, then at intervals throughout the project. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. Transcripts were analysed using constant comparison to identify emerging themes. Key themes centred on the assumptions and negotiation surrounding the emerging roles of the PCPs (as seen by themselves and other staff), particularly the conflict between operational (day-to-day work with patients) and strategic (forward planning) roles. The PCP appeared to act as a catalyst for the view that patients were not presenting “inappropriately”, rather, the problems presented at A&E might be best dealt with in different parts of the healthcare system, or by different personnel, and it is the service currently available that is inappropriate. By deploying the GP in a new role as PCP, but with the traditional autonomy associated with being a GP, and allowing him/her to develop the role according to local need, the new service evolved to identify and meet the needs of patients more appropriately. The use of the expanded role of the GP may be more successful in achieving ‘joined-up’ services than deploying other professional groups, such as nurses, to fulfil a specific role.