Sharing insight or blowing smoke? The case for descriptive patient representatives on community health center boards.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Amanda S Patel, Clarissa R Steele, Gregory R Beaver
{"title":"Sharing insight or blowing smoke? The case for descriptive patient representatives on community health center boards.","authors":"Amanda S Patel, Clarissa R Steele, Gregory R Beaver","doi":"10.1097/HMR.0000000000000430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Community health centers (CHCs) receive federal grant money to reduce health care disparities. To be eligible, at least 51% of their board members must be descriptively representative patients (i.e., truly represent the population served by the clinic). However, research paints an unclear picture of how these patients influence board effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of descriptively representative patients on board conversations contributing to the board's effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Methodology/approach: </strong>Two studies were conducted. Study 1 involved 23 semistructured interviews, observations of six board meetings, and five discussions with subject matter experts to examine the impact of descriptively representative patients on conversations that contribute to board effectiveness. Study 2 was a two-wave survey administered to 177 CHC chief executive or operating officers to investigate the impact of descriptively representative patients on the relationship between volubility (i.e., the amount of talking within a group) and board effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Study 1 revealed that although representative patients provided valuable insights, there was skepticism about their ability to contribute effectively, leading some to circumvent the requirement for such members. Additionally, we found that descriptively representative patients influence two key mechanisms-participative decision making and pointless discussion-through which conversations influence board effectiveness. In Study 2, we discovered that increased descriptive patient representation can mitigate the negative impact of volubility on pointless discussion and, in turn, enhance board effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Descriptive patient representatives are valuable members of CHC boards, and the information they provide can keep conversations more focused.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>CHC boards should not underestimate the value of truly representative patients. The Health Resources and Services Administration, which provides grants to CHCs, should be aware of efforts to circumvent the requirement for descriptive patient representation on CHC boards.</p>","PeriodicalId":47778,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Management Review","volume":" ","pages":"150-161"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000430","RegionNum":3,"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

Background: Community health centers (CHCs) receive federal grant money to reduce health care disparities. To be eligible, at least 51% of their board members must be descriptively representative patients (i.e., truly represent the population served by the clinic). However, research paints an unclear picture of how these patients influence board effectiveness.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of descriptively representative patients on board conversations contributing to the board's effectiveness.

Methodology/approach: Two studies were conducted. Study 1 involved 23 semistructured interviews, observations of six board meetings, and five discussions with subject matter experts to examine the impact of descriptively representative patients on conversations that contribute to board effectiveness. Study 2 was a two-wave survey administered to 177 CHC chief executive or operating officers to investigate the impact of descriptively representative patients on the relationship between volubility (i.e., the amount of talking within a group) and board effectiveness.

Results: Study 1 revealed that although representative patients provided valuable insights, there was skepticism about their ability to contribute effectively, leading some to circumvent the requirement for such members. Additionally, we found that descriptively representative patients influence two key mechanisms-participative decision making and pointless discussion-through which conversations influence board effectiveness. In Study 2, we discovered that increased descriptive patient representation can mitigate the negative impact of volubility on pointless discussion and, in turn, enhance board effectiveness.

Conclusion: Descriptive patient representatives are valuable members of CHC boards, and the information they provide can keep conversations more focused.

Practice implications: CHC boards should not underestimate the value of truly representative patients. The Health Resources and Services Administration, which provides grants to CHCs, should be aware of efforts to circumvent the requirement for descriptive patient representation on CHC boards.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Care Management Review
Health Care Management Review HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Health Care Management Review (HCMR) disseminates state-of-the-art knowledge about management, leadership, and administration of health care systems, organizations, and agencies. Multidisciplinary and international in scope, articles present completed research relevant to health care management, leadership, and administration, as well report on rigorous evaluations of health care management innovations, or provide a synthesis of prior research that results in evidence-based health care management practice recommendations. Articles are theory-driven and translate findings into implications and recommendations for health care administrators, researchers, and faculty.
×
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