Employee voice in healthcare: a systematic review.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Leah Hague, Michael Barry, Paula K Mowbray, Adrian Wilkinson, Ariel Avgar
{"title":"Employee voice in healthcare: a systematic review.","authors":"Leah Hague, Michael Barry, Paula K Mowbray, Adrian Wilkinson, Ariel Avgar","doi":"10.1108/JHOM-11-2023-0353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aim to advance our understanding by examining voices related to employees' own interests and associated outcomes for employees and healthcare organizations. Patient safety reviews do not explore contextual factors such as organizational or professional cultures and regulatory environments in depth, and arguments for overcoming barriers to voice in health are underdeveloped. The research has largely developed in separate literature (various subdisciplines of management and the health field), and we outline the divergent emphases and opportunities for integration with the aim of investigating all relevant contextual factors and providing guidance on best practice informed by multiple disciplines.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>A systematic approach was taken to gathering and reviewing articles, and coding and reporting are in line with the most recent Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (Rethlefsen <i>et al</i>., 2021).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We identified a range of facilitators, barriers and outcomes of employee interest voice at different levels (organizational, leadership, team or individual) in a healthcare context. We identify various theoretical, methodological and knowledge gaps, and we suggest several ways in which these can be addressed in future research efforts.</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>We make multiple contributions to both theory and practice, including highlighting the importance and implications of integrating disciplinary approaches, broadening context, improving research design and exploring under-researched samples and topics. This information is essential in providing a more comprehensive model of healthcare voice and to shifting management focus to include all forms of employee voice in healthcare for the benefit of staff and patients.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>We make multiple contributions to both theory and practice including highlighting the importance of integrating disciplinary approaches, broadening context to include employee interest issues, improving research design and exploring under-researched samples and topics. This information is essential in providing a more comprehensive model of health care voice and to shifting management focus to take a more inclusive view of employee voice in healthcare for the benefit of staff as well as patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":47447,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Organization and Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Organization and Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-11-2023-0353","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We aim to advance our understanding by examining voices related to employees' own interests and associated outcomes for employees and healthcare organizations. Patient safety reviews do not explore contextual factors such as organizational or professional cultures and regulatory environments in depth, and arguments for overcoming barriers to voice in health are underdeveloped. The research has largely developed in separate literature (various subdisciplines of management and the health field), and we outline the divergent emphases and opportunities for integration with the aim of investigating all relevant contextual factors and providing guidance on best practice informed by multiple disciplines.

Design/methodology/approach: A systematic approach was taken to gathering and reviewing articles, and coding and reporting are in line with the most recent Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (Rethlefsen et al., 2021).

Findings: We identified a range of facilitators, barriers and outcomes of employee interest voice at different levels (organizational, leadership, team or individual) in a healthcare context. We identify various theoretical, methodological and knowledge gaps, and we suggest several ways in which these can be addressed in future research efforts.

Practical implications: We make multiple contributions to both theory and practice, including highlighting the importance and implications of integrating disciplinary approaches, broadening context, improving research design and exploring under-researched samples and topics. This information is essential in providing a more comprehensive model of healthcare voice and to shifting management focus to include all forms of employee voice in healthcare for the benefit of staff and patients.

Originality/value: We make multiple contributions to both theory and practice including highlighting the importance of integrating disciplinary approaches, broadening context to include employee interest issues, improving research design and exploring under-researched samples and topics. This information is essential in providing a more comprehensive model of health care voice and to shifting management focus to take a more inclusive view of employee voice in healthcare for the benefit of staff as well as patients.

医疗保健中的员工声音:系统回顾。
目的:我们旨在通过研究与员工自身利益相关的声音以及员工和医疗保健组织的相关结果来促进我们的理解。患者安全审查没有深入探讨组织或专业文化以及监管环境等背景因素,而且关于克服卫生领域发声障碍的论据也不发达。该研究在很大程度上是在独立的文献(管理和卫生领域的各个分支学科)中发展起来的,我们概述了不同的重点和整合的机会,目的是调查所有相关的背景因素,并为多学科的最佳实践提供指导。设计/方法/方法:采用系统方法收集和审查文章,编码和报告符合最新的系统审查和荟萃分析首选报告项目(Rethlefsen等人,2021)。研究结果:我们确定了医疗保健环境中不同层次(组织、领导、团队或个人)员工兴趣表达的一系列促进因素、障碍和结果。我们确定了各种理论、方法和知识差距,并提出了在未来的研究工作中解决这些差距的几种方法。实践意义:我们对理论和实践都做出了多方面的贡献,包括强调整合学科方法的重要性和意义,拓宽背景,改进研究设计和探索研究不足的样本和主题。这些信息对于提供更全面的医疗保健声音模型以及将管理重点转移到包括医疗保健中所有形式的员工声音以造福员工和患者至关重要。原创性/价值:我们对理论和实践都做出了多方面的贡献,包括强调整合学科方法的重要性,扩大背景以包括员工利益问题,改进研究设计和探索研究不足的样本和主题。这些信息对于提供更全面的医疗保健声音模型以及将管理重点转移到对医疗保健中的员工声音采取更具包容性的观点,以使员工和患者受益至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: ■International health and international organizations ■Organisational behaviour, governance, management and leadership ■The inter-relationship of health and public sector services ■Theories and practices of management and leadership in health and related organizations ■Emotion in health care organizations ■Management education and training ■Industrial relations and human resource theory and management. As the demands on the health care industry both polarize and intensify, effective management of financial and human resources, the restructuring of organizations and the handling of market forces are increasingly important areas for the industry to address.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信