Clinical governance in Dutch hospitals. Issue 4 (30th September 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Botje, Daan; Plochg, Thomas; S. Klazinga, Niek; Wagner, Cordula
• Is Part Of: Clinical governance. Volume 19:Issue 4(2014)
• Page Start: 322
• Page End: 331
• Publication Date: 2014-09-30
• Subjects: Medical care -- Quality control -- Periodicals; Medical care -- Evaluation -- Periodicals; Outcome assessment (Medical care) -- Periodicals; Medical care -- Finance -- Periodicals; 362.1068
• DOI: 10.1108/CGIJ-08-2014-0028
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1477-7274

Abstract

<abstract> <title> <x content-type="archive" xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Purpose</title> <p> – For accountability purposes, performance information sharing and clear divisions of responsibilities between medical specialists and executive boards are critical. The purpose of this paper is to explore whether these aspects of clinical governance have been taken up by executive boards and medical specialists in the Netherlands. </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Design/methodology/approach</title> <p> – This cross-sectional study aimed to explore the information-sharing between medical specialists and executive boards in Dutch hospitals as one key aspect of clinical governance. Between November 2010 and February 2011, 67 medical staff board chairs and 40 chief executive officers completed an online questionnaire concerning information-sharing and the clinical governance practices within their respective hospitals. </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Findings</title> <p> – Almost all respondents acknowledged the importance of information-sharing. However, the actual sharing differed per type of performance information. Policy/management information was shared more often than patient care information. Similarly, medical specialists differ in the degree of responsibility the take for specific clinical governance tasks. Almost all were involved in managing complication registries (99 per cent), while few managed hospital accreditation (55 per cent). </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Research limitations/implications</title> <p> – With executive boards and medical specialists being increasingly dependent of a shared budget, they have an extra incentive to share information and to take up clinical governance tasks. The study showed that Dutch medical specialists are sharing many types of performance information with the executive board, but that this should be increased to comply with the codes. Thus far, few hospital managers in the study have formalised this in an information protocol, which is potentially the next step for other hospital staff to incorporate as well. Those who have an information protocol seem to be aware of the business case for quality. </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Originality/value</title> <p> – This study is the first attempt to explore to what extent Dutch medical specialists share performance information with their respective executive boards and take up clinical governance tasks.</p> </sec> </abstract>