What makes an effective Quality Improvement Manager? A qualitative study in the New Zealand Health System.

PURPOSE: Quality improvement is an international priority, and health organisations invest heavily in this endeavour. Little, however, is known of the role and perspectives of Quality Improvement Managers who are responsible for quality improvement implementation. We explored the quality improvement managers' accounts of what competencies and qualities they require to achieve day-to-day and long-term quality improvement objectives. DESIGN: Qualitative exploratory design using an interpretivist approach with semi-structured interviews analysed thematically. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were conducted with 56 quality improvement managers from 15 (out of 20) New Zealand District Health Boards. Participants were divided into two groups: traditional and clinical quality improvement managers. The former group consisted of those with formal quality improvement education-typically operations managers or process engineers. The latter group was represented by clinical staff-physicians and nurses-who received on-the-job training. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: quality improvement expertise, leadership competencies and interpersonal competencies. Effective quality improvement managers require quality improvement experience and expertise in healthcare environments. They require leadership competencies including sense-giving, taking a long-term view and systems thinking. They also require interpersonal competencies including approachability, trustworthiness and supportiveness. Traditional and clinical quality improvement managers attributed different value to these characteristics with traditional quality improvement managers emphasising leadership competencies and interpersonal skills more than clinical quality improvement managers. CONCLUSIONS: We differentiate between traditional and clinical quality improvement managers, and suggest how both groups can be better prepared to be effective in their roles. Both groups require a comprehensive socialisation and training process designed to meet specific learning needs.

Why is Quality Improvement so Challenging? A Viable Systems Model Perspective to Understand the Frustrations of Healthcare Quality Improvement Managers.

The challenges facing Quality Improvement Managers (QIMs) are often understood and addressed in isolation from wider healthcare organisation within which quality improvement initiatives are embedded. We draw on Stafford Beer's Viable System Model (VSM) to shed light on how the viability of quality improvement depends on the effective functioning of five critical quality improvement systems and the extent to which these systems are integrated within the healthcare organisation. These systems are System 1 (Operations), System 2 (Coordination), System 3 (Operational Control), System 4 (Development) and System 5 (Policy). Our analysis draws on interviews with 56 QIMs working in 15 of New Zealand's 20 District Health Boards. We use VSM to identify the sources of problems in QI implementation. These include changes in direction for QI initiatives; myopic behaviour resulting from fragmented systems of care; difficulties in managing and monitoring QI activities given variable staff engagement and inadequate resourcing; pressure for quick results rather developing QI capabilities; and a lack of strategic embeddedness. A viable QI system requires QI approaches that are (1) implemented at an organisation-wide level; (2) well-resourced and carefully monitored; (3) underpinned by a long-term vision; and (4) supported by QIMs with the necessary power and influence to integrate QI subsystem within the wider healthcare organisation.

Perceptions of co-designing health promotion interventions with Indigenous communities in New Zealand.

Health inequities among Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities are well documented and the research literature includes robust discussions about innovative ways to reduce inequities including co-design. Co-designing health promotion interventions with Indigenous communities presents many benefits and challenges for researchers, health professionals and communities involved in the process. The purpose of this study was to identify the facilitators and barriers of co-designing a health promotion intervention with Maori communities. Additionally, this study considers a specific Maori co-design framework, He Pikinga Waiora (HPW). HPW is a participatory approach to creating interventions emphasizing community engagement, systems thinking and centred on Kaupapa Maori (an approach grounded in Maori worldviews). The research design for this study was Kaupapa Maori. Participants (n = 19) in this study were stakeholders in the New Zealand health sector. Participants were interviewed using an in-depth, semi-structured protocol. Thematic analysis was employed to analyse the data. Facilitators for co-designing health promotion interventions with Maori communities were collaboration and community voice. Barriers identified were mismanaged expectations and research constraints. Finally, facilitators for the HPW framework included providing clear guidelines and being grounded in Maori perspectives, while barriers included limited concrete case studies, jargon and questions about sustainability. Collaboration and inclusion of community voice supports the development of more effective co-design health promotion interventions within Maori communities which may address health inequities. The HPW framework offers clear guidelines and Maori perspectives which may assist in the development of effective co-design health promotion interventions, although areas for improvement were suggested.

Lean thinking in healthcare - Findings from a systematic literature network and bibliometric analysis.

This paper draws on 299 published articles from six databases, and utilizes a novel methodology combining elements of a systematic literature review, citation network analysis, and bibliometric analysis, to track the development of Lean Thinking (LT) in healthcare-a popular improvement methodology increasingly being adopted by healthcare organizations. A review of the LT literature in healthcare identifies that a piecemeal approach appears to have been taken regarding LT in health, with departmental focused implementations rather than LT's intended systems approach. In addition, tool-myopic thinking tends to be a prevalent practice and often governs implementations, with less attention provided to soft practices such as continuous improvement and employee empowerment, undermining the long-term sustainability of LT's improvements. To fully explore the scope of LT, a parallel analysis of the Healthcare Supply Chain Management (HSCM) literature was also undertaken to determine whether these same tendencies were present. This paper identified a substantial gap between the LT and the HSCM literatures as mirrored by the citation network analysis by uncovering almost no inter-disciplinary cross-citations. Bibliometric analysis identified the same divide in terms of authors, with only three publishing in both fields. It is crucial that LT is considered a system-wide approach and implementations move beyond departmental/functional boundaries and incorporate extended supply chains to ensure waste elimination rather than waste transference to other entities in supply chains.

He Pikinga Waiora: supporting Maori health organisations to respond to pre-diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) is a common long-term condition affecting the health and wellbeing of New Zealanders; one in every four New Zealanders is pre-diabetic. Maori, the Indigenous people of New Zealand, are at an increased risk of developing pre-diabetes and T2D and there are significant inequities between Maori and non-Maori for T2D complications. The purpose of this study was to explore the questions of how the strengths of Maori heath organisations may be leveraged, and how the barriers and constraints experienced by Maori health organisations may be negotiated, for the benefit of Maori; and from a systems perspective, to identify strategic opportunities that may be considered and applied by Maori health organisations, funders and policy makers to respond more effectively to pre-diabetes and reduce health inequities between Maori and non-Maori. METHODS: Utilising case study methodology, a range of data sources were triangulated including nine semi-structured interviews, documents, and a diabetes system map to identify possible strategic opportunities for key stakeholders to respond more effectively to pre-diabetes. RESULTS: Key themes and possible actions to improve health outcomes for Maori with pre-diabetes include: (1) Recognising Maori health organisations as conduits for the community voice and influential partners in the community to effect change; (2) Strengthened partnerships with Maori health organisations for community benefit and to support measurable, evidence-based change and service delivery, particularly when Maori knowledge systems are viewed alongside a Western scientific approach; and (3) Intersectoral integration of health and social services to support provision of whanau-centred care and influence the social determinants of health and local environment. CONCLUSIONS: Maori health organisations are important actors in systems seeking to improve outcomes and eliminate health inequities. Support from funders and policy makers will be required to build on the strengths of these organisations and to overcome system challenges. To realise improved health outcomes for Maori, the value placed on whanau and community perspectives not only needs to be acknowledged in the implementation of health interventions, health and social policies and funding arrangements, but performance measures, service design and delivery must evolve to accommodate these perspectives in practice.

Implementation framework for chronic disease intervention effectiveness in Maori and other indigenous communities.

BACKGROUND: About 40% of all health burden in New Zealand is due to cancer, cardiovascular disease, and type 2 diabetes/obesity. Outcomes for Maori (indigenous people) are significantly worse than non-Maori; these inequities mirror those found in indigenous communities elsewhere. Evidence-based interventions with established efficacy may not be effective in indigenous communities without addressing specific implementation challenges. We present an implementation framework for interventions to prevent and treat chronic conditions for Maori and other indigenous communities. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: The He Pikinga Waiora Implementation Framework has indigenous self-determination at its core and consists of four elements: cultural-centeredness, community engagement, systems thinking, and integrated knowledge translation. All elements have conceptual fit with Kaupapa Maori aspirations (i.e., indigenous knowledge creation, theorizing, and methodology) and all have demonstrated evidence of positive implementation outcomes. APPLYING THE FRAMEWORK: A coding scheme derived from the Framework was applied to 13 studies of diabetes prevention in indigenous communities in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States from a systematic review. Cross-tabulations demonstrated that culture-centeredness (p = .008) and community engagement (p = .009) explained differences in diabetes outcomes and community engagement (p = .098) explained difference in blood pressure outcomes. IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: The He Pikinga Waiora Implementation Framework appears to be well suited to advance implementation science for indigenous communities in general and Maori in particular. The framework has promise as a policy and planning tool to evaluate and design effective interventions for chronic disease prevention in indigenous communities.