利益相关者对质量的看法如何影响医疗保健交易:来自整个生态系统关键决策者的见解。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Journal of Healthcare Management Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-02 DOI:10.1097/JHM-D-24-00078
Melissa Culhane Maravic, Suepattra G May, Elizabeth Oyekan, Jocelyn Vanderbrink, Meaghan Roach, Kassidy Shumaker, Irina Kolobova, Esther Renee Smith-Howell, Dennis Scanlon
{"title":"利益相关者对质量的看法如何影响医疗保健交易:来自整个生态系统关键决策者的见解。","authors":"Melissa Culhane Maravic, Suepattra G May, Elizabeth Oyekan, Jocelyn Vanderbrink, Meaghan Roach, Kassidy Shumaker, Irina Kolobova, Esther Renee Smith-Howell, Dennis Scanlon","doi":"10.1097/JHM-D-24-00078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Goal: </strong>In today's healthcare ecosystem, quality measures are theorized to inform the spectrum of healthcare delivery and evaluation, including specific functional areas such as quality improvement, regulation, accreditation, and value-based payment. Yet, the ways in which expectations about quality-real or perceived-shape and inform transactional relationships between healthcare stakeholders have not been well elucidated. We elicited the perspectives of healthcare decision-makers to understand their experiences with quality and how they may influence transactions and strategic alliances.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A qualitative study incorporating semistructured in-depth interviews conducted with C-suite and D-suite decision-makers in the United States representing a mix of different types of healthcare organizations. Interviewees were asked about organizational culture and strategic priorities, qualities sought in potential business partners, and factors that drive decisions to transact with external partners. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and data were analyzed to identify key themes.</p><p><strong>Principal findings: </strong>Quality, as an objective measure (e.g., the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set [HEDIS] or the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems [CAHPS]), or a subjective assessment, was only one of many considerations that shaped transactional relationships with external healthcare stakeholders. Key informants described a range of factors considered, including partner reputation, alignment of culture and mission, and ability to achieve strategic priorities. While the term quality was broadly used and defined among the key informants, participants often incorporated the term value into their lexicography of quality and felt that value played a more significant role in decision-making. Standardized quality measures can be useful both for prompting investment within organizations and for deciding when to seek the assistance of external parties to help improve commonly collected and reported quality measures. Ultimately, the manner in which quality manifests in real-world practice and operations is not as simple or straightforward as policymakers or quality metrics developers may believe.</p><p><strong>Practical applications: </strong>Although there has been significant public and private investment in quality initiatives, including their use in payment and regulatory models, this study elucidates how stakeholders across the healthcare ecosystem assess quality from a strategic operating perspective. We identified a number of key drivers that underpin transactional relationships and that ultimately impact the results of standardized and publicly reported quality measures captured for payment, regulation, and public accountability purposes. While decisions regarding these relationships are internal matters and thus fall outside the scope of regulators, policymakers and regulators need to understand their importance and likely correlation with what is ultimately measured and used for payment, regulation, and public transparency.</p>","PeriodicalId":51633,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Management","volume":"70 5","pages":"354-368"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Stakeholder Perceptions of Quality Shape Healthcare Transactions: Insights from Key Decision-Makers Across the Ecosystem.\",\"authors\":\"Melissa Culhane Maravic, Suepattra G May, Elizabeth Oyekan, Jocelyn Vanderbrink, Meaghan Roach, Kassidy Shumaker, Irina Kolobova, Esther Renee Smith-Howell, Dennis Scanlon\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JHM-D-24-00078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Goal: </strong>In today's healthcare ecosystem, quality measures are theorized to inform the spectrum of healthcare delivery and evaluation, including specific functional areas such as quality improvement, regulation, accreditation, and value-based payment. Yet, the ways in which expectations about quality-real or perceived-shape and inform transactional relationships between healthcare stakeholders have not been well elucidated. We elicited the perspectives of healthcare decision-makers to understand their experiences with quality and how they may influence transactions and strategic alliances.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A qualitative study incorporating semistructured in-depth interviews conducted with C-suite and D-suite decision-makers in the United States representing a mix of different types of healthcare organizations. Interviewees were asked about organizational culture and strategic priorities, qualities sought in potential business partners, and factors that drive decisions to transact with external partners. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and data were analyzed to identify key themes.</p><p><strong>Principal findings: </strong>Quality, as an objective measure (e.g., the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set [HEDIS] or the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems [CAHPS]), or a subjective assessment, was only one of many considerations that shaped transactional relationships with external healthcare stakeholders. Key informants described a range of factors considered, including partner reputation, alignment of culture and mission, and ability to achieve strategic priorities. While the term quality was broadly used and defined among the key informants, participants often incorporated the term value into their lexicography of quality and felt that value played a more significant role in decision-making. Standardized quality measures can be useful both for prompting investment within organizations and for deciding when to seek the assistance of external parties to help improve commonly collected and reported quality measures. Ultimately, the manner in which quality manifests in real-world practice and operations is not as simple or straightforward as policymakers or quality metrics developers may believe.</p><p><strong>Practical applications: </strong>Although there has been significant public and private investment in quality initiatives, including their use in payment and regulatory models, this study elucidates how stakeholders across the healthcare ecosystem assess quality from a strategic operating perspective. We identified a number of key drivers that underpin transactional relationships and that ultimately impact the results of standardized and publicly reported quality measures captured for payment, regulation, and public accountability purposes. While decisions regarding these relationships are internal matters and thus fall outside the scope of regulators, policymakers and regulators need to understand their importance and likely correlation with what is ultimately measured and used for payment, regulation, and public transparency.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Healthcare Management\",\"volume\":\"70 5\",\"pages\":\"354-368\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Healthcare Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JHM-D-24-00078\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/9/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JHM-D-24-00078","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:在当今的医疗保健生态系统中,质量度量被理论化,以告知医疗保健交付和评估的范围,包括特定的功能领域,如质量改进、监管、认证和基于价值的支付。然而,对质量的期望——真实的或感知的——塑造和告知医疗保健利益相关者之间的交易关系的方式尚未得到很好的阐明。我们从医疗保健决策者的角度出发,了解他们在质量方面的经验,以及这些经验如何影响交易和战略联盟。方法:一项定性研究,结合半结构化的深度访谈,对美国代表不同类型医疗保健组织的C-suite和D-suite决策者进行了访谈。受访者被问及组织文化和战略重点,在潜在商业伙伴中寻求的品质,以及驱动与外部合作伙伴进行交易决策的因素。采访被录音并逐字抄写,数据被分析以确定关键主题。主要发现:质量,作为一种客观衡量标准(例如,医疗保健有效性数据和信息集[HEDIS]或医疗保健提供者和系统的消费者评估[CAHPS]),或一种主观评估,只是与外部医疗保健利益相关者形成交易关系的众多考虑因素之一。关键线人描述了一系列考虑的因素,包括合作伙伴的声誉,文化和使命的一致性,以及实现战略优先事项的能力。虽然“质量”一词在关键信息提供者中被广泛使用和定义,但参与者经常将“价值”一词纳入他们的“质量”词典,并认为“价值”在决策中起着更重要的作用。标准化的质量度量对于促进组织内部的投资和决定何时寻求外部各方的帮助以帮助改进通常收集和报告的质量度量都是有用的。最终,质量在现实世界的实践和操作中表现出来的方式并不像决策者或质量度量开发人员可能认为的那样简单或直接。实际应用:尽管在质量倡议方面有大量的公共和私人投资,包括它们在支付和监管模式中的使用,但本研究阐明了整个医疗保健生态系统的利益相关者如何从战略运营的角度评估质量。我们确定了一些支撑交易关系的关键驱动因素,并最终影响为支付、监管和公共问责目的捕获的标准化和公开报告的质量度量的结果。虽然有关这些关系的决策是内部事务,因此不属于监管机构的范围,但政策制定者和监管机构需要了解它们的重要性,以及它们与最终衡量和用于支付、监管和公共透明度的东西之间可能存在的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Stakeholder Perceptions of Quality Shape Healthcare Transactions: Insights from Key Decision-Makers Across the Ecosystem.

Goal: In today's healthcare ecosystem, quality measures are theorized to inform the spectrum of healthcare delivery and evaluation, including specific functional areas such as quality improvement, regulation, accreditation, and value-based payment. Yet, the ways in which expectations about quality-real or perceived-shape and inform transactional relationships between healthcare stakeholders have not been well elucidated. We elicited the perspectives of healthcare decision-makers to understand their experiences with quality and how they may influence transactions and strategic alliances.

Methods: A qualitative study incorporating semistructured in-depth interviews conducted with C-suite and D-suite decision-makers in the United States representing a mix of different types of healthcare organizations. Interviewees were asked about organizational culture and strategic priorities, qualities sought in potential business partners, and factors that drive decisions to transact with external partners. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and data were analyzed to identify key themes.

Principal findings: Quality, as an objective measure (e.g., the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set [HEDIS] or the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems [CAHPS]), or a subjective assessment, was only one of many considerations that shaped transactional relationships with external healthcare stakeholders. Key informants described a range of factors considered, including partner reputation, alignment of culture and mission, and ability to achieve strategic priorities. While the term quality was broadly used and defined among the key informants, participants often incorporated the term value into their lexicography of quality and felt that value played a more significant role in decision-making. Standardized quality measures can be useful both for prompting investment within organizations and for deciding when to seek the assistance of external parties to help improve commonly collected and reported quality measures. Ultimately, the manner in which quality manifests in real-world practice and operations is not as simple or straightforward as policymakers or quality metrics developers may believe.

Practical applications: Although there has been significant public and private investment in quality initiatives, including their use in payment and regulatory models, this study elucidates how stakeholders across the healthcare ecosystem assess quality from a strategic operating perspective. We identified a number of key drivers that underpin transactional relationships and that ultimately impact the results of standardized and publicly reported quality measures captured for payment, regulation, and public accountability purposes. While decisions regarding these relationships are internal matters and thus fall outside the scope of regulators, policymakers and regulators need to understand their importance and likely correlation with what is ultimately measured and used for payment, regulation, and public transparency.

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 Management
Journal of Healthcare Management HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: The Journal of Healthcare Management is the official journal of the American College of Healthcare Executives. Six times per year, JHM offers timely healthcare management articles that inform and guide executives, managers, educators, and researchers. JHM also contains regular columns written by experts and practitioners in the field that discuss management-related topics and industry trends. Each issue presents an interview with a leading executive.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信