Network governance forms in healthcare: empirical evidence from two Italian cancer networks.

BACKGROUND: This study focuses on the application of Provan and Kenis' modes of network governance to the specific field of public healthcare networks, extending the framework to an analysis of systems in which networks are involved. Thus, the aim of this study is to analyze and compare the governance of two cancer networks in two Italian regions that underwent system reconfiguration processes due to reforms in the healthcare system. METHODS: A qualitative study of two clinical networks in the Italian healthcare system was conducted. The sample for interviews included representatives of the regional administration (n = 4), network coordinators (n = 6), and general and clinical directors of health organizations involved in the two networks (n = 25). Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Our study shows that healthcare system reforms have a limited impact on network governance structures. In fact, strong inertial tendencies characterize networks, especially network administrative organization models (NAO). Networks tend to find their own balance with respect to the trade-offs analyzed using a mix of formal and informal ties. Our study confirms the general validity of Provan and Kenis' framework and shows how other specific factors and contingencies may affect the possibility that cancer networks find positive equilibria between competing needs of inclusivity and efficiency, internal and external legitimacy, and stability and flexibility. It also shows how networks react to external changes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows the importance of considering three factors and contingencies that may affect network effectiveness: a) the importance of looking at network governance modes not in isolation, but in relationship to the governance of regional systems; b) the influence of a specific network's governance structure on the network's ability to respond to tensions and to achieve its goals; and c) the need to take into account the role of professionals in network governance.

Health-Literate Healthcare Organizations and Quality of Care in Hospitals: A Cross-Sectional Study Conducted in Tuscany.

The concept of Health-Literate Healthcare Organization (HLHO) concerns the strategies by which healthcare organizations make it easier for people to navigate, understand, and use information and services to take care of their health. The aims of this study were to validate the HLHO-10 questionnaire in the Italian language; to measure the degree of implementation of the 10 attributes of HLHOs in a sample of hospitals placed in Tuscany; and to assess the association between the degree of implementation of the 10 attributes of HLHOs and the perceived quality of care. This was a cross-sectional study where data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire including three sections: a descriptive section, a section focused on the perceived quality, and the Italian version of the HLHO-10 questionnaire. A total amount of 405 healthcare managers answered the questionnaire (54.9%). The analysis shows that the HLHO score is significantly associated with the type of hospitals: accredited private hospitals have higher HLHO scores. Moreover, the perceived quality increases with the increasing of the HLHO score, with the highest coefficient for local public hospitals. In conclusion, Organizational Health Literacy culture should be an integral element for the management to improve the quality of care.

Models for governing relationships in healthcare organizations: Some empirical evidence.

Recently, most European countries have undergone integration processes through mergers and strategic alliances between healthcare organizations. The present paper examined three cases within the Italian National Health Service in order to determine how different organizations, within differing institutional contexts, govern an healthcare integration process. Furthermore, we explored the possibility that the governance mode, usually seen as alternatives (i.e., merger or alliance), could be considered as a separate step in the development of a more suitable integration process. Multiple case studies were used to compare different integration approaches. Specifically, three cases were considered, of which two were characterized by collaborative processes and the other by a merger. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers involved in the processes. Each case presents different governing modes, structures, and mechanisms for achieving integration. The role played by the institutional context also led to different results with unique advantages and disadvantages. Three main conclusions are discussed: (a) Alliances and mergers can be interpreted as different steps in a path leading to a better integration; (b) The alignment between institutional/political time horizon and the time needed for the organizations to achieve an integration process lead to a better integration;