探索信任和参与:学术医疗中心临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间关系的定性评估。

IF 3.4 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Journal of Healthcare Leadership Pub Date : 2025-02-27 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JHL.S503086
Eric J Keller, Niraj Sehgal, Robert K Ryu, Howard Chrisman, Robert K Vogelzang, Tait D Shanafelt
{"title":"探索信任和参与:学术医疗中心临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间关系的定性评估。","authors":"Eric J Keller, Niraj Sehgal, Robert K Ryu, Howard Chrisman, Robert K Vogelzang, Tait D Shanafelt","doi":"10.2147/JHL.S503086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders are critical in determining the culture and success of Academic Medical Centers (AMCs). These dynamics are complex, making it challenging to develop effective means of improving these relationships. This study sought to characterize and compare relationships between clinicians and healthcare leaders at three AMCs to develop more effective means of improving healthcare organization cultures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The authors interviewed clinicians, clinician leaders, and operational leaders at three AMCs about their role, perceived dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders, and ideal leadership. Interviews continued until additional interviews stopped revealing new information at each organization, requiring a total of 92 participants (49% male, 54% clinicians, 22% clinician-leaders, 24% operational leaders). Interview transcripts were systematically analyzed based on constructivist grounded theory and content analysis for key themes.</p><p><strong>Results and discussion: </strong>The perceived most pressing issues at each AMC varied across three key cultural levels: organization, department, and practice. When interventions targeted levels distinct from the level perceived most pressing, they tended to exacerbate existing issues and further undermine trust and engagement between clinicians and healthcare leaders. Clinicians and healthcare leaders across AMCs described similar traits of ideal leadership but exhibited different understandings of what those traits meant in application. Cultural dynamics were also challenged by professional cultural differences between the three groups and barriers such as differences in status, location, and background. Limitations of this study included its cross-sectional nature and potential sampling bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The level of organizational culture where the greatest tension exists between clinicians and healthcare leaders varies by three key levels. Discerning which level of organizational culture represents the greatest local opportunity can inform the design of more targeted interventions to improve dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders seeking to foster more constructive partnerships.</p>","PeriodicalId":44346,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Leadership","volume":"17 ","pages":"75-83"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11879774/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring Trust and Engagement: A Qualitative Evaluation of the Relationship Between Clinicians and Healthcare Leaders at Academic Medical Centers.\",\"authors\":\"Eric J Keller, Niraj Sehgal, Robert K Ryu, Howard Chrisman, Robert K Vogelzang, Tait D Shanafelt\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JHL.S503086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders are critical in determining the culture and success of Academic Medical Centers (AMCs). These dynamics are complex, making it challenging to develop effective means of improving these relationships. This study sought to characterize and compare relationships between clinicians and healthcare leaders at three AMCs to develop more effective means of improving healthcare organization cultures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The authors interviewed clinicians, clinician leaders, and operational leaders at three AMCs about their role, perceived dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders, and ideal leadership. Interviews continued until additional interviews stopped revealing new information at each organization, requiring a total of 92 participants (49% male, 54% clinicians, 22% clinician-leaders, 24% operational leaders). Interview transcripts were systematically analyzed based on constructivist grounded theory and content analysis for key themes.</p><p><strong>Results and discussion: </strong>The perceived most pressing issues at each AMC varied across three key cultural levels: organization, department, and practice. When interventions targeted levels distinct from the level perceived most pressing, they tended to exacerbate existing issues and further undermine trust and engagement between clinicians and healthcare leaders. Clinicians and healthcare leaders across AMCs described similar traits of ideal leadership but exhibited different understandings of what those traits meant in application. Cultural dynamics were also challenged by professional cultural differences between the three groups and barriers such as differences in status, location, and background. Limitations of this study included its cross-sectional nature and potential sampling bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The level of organizational culture where the greatest tension exists between clinicians and healthcare leaders varies by three key levels. Discerning which level of organizational culture represents the greatest local opportunity can inform the design of more targeted interventions to improve dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders seeking to foster more constructive partnerships.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44346,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Healthcare Leadership\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"75-83\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11879774/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Healthcare Leadership\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S503086\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Leadership","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S503086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间的动态是决定学术医疗中心(amc)的文化和成功的关键。这些动态是复杂的,使得开发改善这些关系的有效手段具有挑战性。本研究旨在描述和比较三个amc的临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间的关系,以开发更有效的方法来改善医疗保健组织文化。材料和方法:作者采访了三个amc的临床医生、临床医生领导者和业务领导者,了解他们的角色、临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间的感知动态以及理想的领导力。访谈继续进行,直到每个组织的额外访谈停止揭示新信息,总共需要92名参与者(49%为男性,54%为临床医生,22%为临床医生领导,24%为业务领导)。基于建构主义理论和关键主题的内容分析,对访谈笔录进行了系统分析。结果和讨论:每个AMC认为最紧迫的问题在三个关键文化层面上有所不同:组织、部门和实践。当干预措施的目标水平不同于认为最紧迫的水平时,它们往往会加剧现有的问题,并进一步破坏临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间的信任和参与。跨amc的临床医生和医疗保健领导者描述了理想领导的相似特征,但对这些特征在应用中的含义表现出不同的理解。三个群体之间的专业文化差异以及地位、地点和背景差异等障碍也对文化动态提出了挑战。本研究的局限性包括其横断面性质和潜在的抽样偏差。结论:临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间存在最大紧张关系的组织文化水平在三个关键水平上有所不同。辨别组织文化的哪个层次代表着最大的本地机会,可以为更有针对性的干预措施的设计提供信息,以改善临床医生和医疗保健领导者之间的动态,寻求促进更具建设性的伙伴关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring Trust and Engagement: A Qualitative Evaluation of the Relationship Between Clinicians and Healthcare Leaders at Academic Medical Centers.

Background: Dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders are critical in determining the culture and success of Academic Medical Centers (AMCs). These dynamics are complex, making it challenging to develop effective means of improving these relationships. This study sought to characterize and compare relationships between clinicians and healthcare leaders at three AMCs to develop more effective means of improving healthcare organization cultures.

Materials and methods: The authors interviewed clinicians, clinician leaders, and operational leaders at three AMCs about their role, perceived dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders, and ideal leadership. Interviews continued until additional interviews stopped revealing new information at each organization, requiring a total of 92 participants (49% male, 54% clinicians, 22% clinician-leaders, 24% operational leaders). Interview transcripts were systematically analyzed based on constructivist grounded theory and content analysis for key themes.

Results and discussion: The perceived most pressing issues at each AMC varied across three key cultural levels: organization, department, and practice. When interventions targeted levels distinct from the level perceived most pressing, they tended to exacerbate existing issues and further undermine trust and engagement between clinicians and healthcare leaders. Clinicians and healthcare leaders across AMCs described similar traits of ideal leadership but exhibited different understandings of what those traits meant in application. Cultural dynamics were also challenged by professional cultural differences between the three groups and barriers such as differences in status, location, and background. Limitations of this study included its cross-sectional nature and potential sampling bias.

Conclusion: The level of organizational culture where the greatest tension exists between clinicians and healthcare leaders varies by three key levels. Discerning which level of organizational culture represents the greatest local opportunity can inform the design of more targeted interventions to improve dynamics between clinicians and healthcare leaders seeking to foster more constructive partnerships.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Healthcare Leadership
Journal of Healthcare Leadership HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
2.30%
发文量
27
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Efficient and successful modern healthcare depends on a growing group of professionals working together as an interdisciplinary team. However, many forces shape the delivery of healthcare; changes are being driven by the markets, transformations in concepts of health and wellbeing, technology and research and discovery. Dynamic leadership will guide these necessary transformations. The Journal of Healthcare Leadership is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal focusing on leadership for the healthcare professions. The publication strives to amalgamate current and future healthcare professionals and managers by providing key insights into leadership progress and challenges to improve patient care. The journal aspires to inform key decision makers and those professionals with ambitions of leadership and management; it seeks to connect professionals who are engaged in similar endeavours and to provide wisdom from those working in other industries. Senior and trainee doctors, nurses and allied healthcare professionals, medical students, healthcare managers and allied leaders are invited to contribute to this publication
×
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