Factors that influence and change medical engagement in Australian not for profit hospitals.

PURPOSE: The study aims to assess medical engagement levels at two teaching hospitals and a 500 bed private hospital in two states operated by the same health care provider and to describe individual and organisational factors that influence and change medical engagement. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A survey was emailed to all junior and senior medical staff, seeking responses to 30 pre-determined items. The survey used a valid and reliable instrument which provided an overall index of medical engagement. Qualitative data were also collected by including an open ended question. FINDINGS: Doctors (n = 810) working at all sites are in the top 20-40 percentile when compared to Australia and the United Kingdom. Two sites in one state were in the highest relative engagement band with the other being in the high relative range when compared to the (UK) and the medium relative band when compared to sites in Australia. Senior doctors working at all three were less engaged on feeling valued and empowered, when compared to having purpose and direction or working in a collaborative culture. This appears to be related to work satisfaction and whether they feel encouraged to develop their skills and progress their careers. Junior doctors at 1 site are much less engaged than colleagues working at another. Since their formal training pathways are identical the informal training experience appears to be an engagement factor. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Despite medical engagement being recognised as crucial, little is known about individual and organisational factors that support doctors to be engaged, particularly for juniors and in the private sector.

Australian doctors are more engaged than UK doctors: why is this the case?

BACKGROUND: Despite reports highlighting the need for greater medical engagement and the benefits of being widely understood, very little information is available on the status of medical engagement in Australia, and how this compares to the UK. Answering this question will no doubt assist training bodies, curriculum designers and policy makers better understand relevant issues. METHODS: The medical engagement questionnaire (MES) was emailed to all medical staff working at 159 UK National Health Service Trusts and 18 health service organisations in Australia. The questionnaire consists of 30 predetermined items seeking responses using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Overall, doctors in the Australian dataset are slightly more engaged, or more positive, than their UK colleagues. Good interpersonal relationships was the only variable that UK doctors scored more positively than their Australian counterparts. At the lower end of the responses, that is the least engaged, we found this even more apparent. Where doctors in Australia are less disengaged, that is still more positive than the UK colleagues. CONCLUSION: While the profiles of medical engagement vary at the sites and also across the MES and subscales, the data illustrate that overall doctors in Australia feel valued and empowered, and they have purpose and direction and work in a collaborate culture. At the most disengaged end of the scale, Australian doctors are markedly less disengaged than their UK counterparts. There may be numerous factors that influence and change how engaged doctors are in both countries. The most prominent of these are appear to be working conditions and lifestyle, driven by funding and other economics issues. This research is likely to be of great interest to regulators and training bodies in both countries.

Turning an idea into reality to improve patient care: the development of the Clinical Support Systems Program.

The concept of the Clinical Support Systems Program (CSSP) was transformed from an idea into reality through the efforts of representatives of the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing and the Royal Australasian College of Physicians. This collaboration involved developing common ground between two different perspectives: those of the funder/policy/administrative sector and those of the clinical practice world. Bridging these differences to establish an agreed approach to moving forward was a lengthy and difficult process. The process is aided by tension for change. Compromise, persistence and commitment to the end-goal by the parties involved were important features in building and maintaining the momentum of the change process. Many of the difficulties experienced could be traced to differences in decision-making processes between the clinical and the administrative paradigms. Knowledge brokers can assist in bridging the different languages and perspectives of the groups involved.

The Clinical Support Systems Program: supporting system-wide improvement.

The Clinical Support Systems Program (CSSP) provided a mechanism for change from the existing entrenched structure and culture of patient care to one based on patient-centred, evidence-based care. The spectrum of change and improvement achieved by the CSSP was extensive, with support from government and active and enthusiastic involvement of clinical champions, practising clinicians, consumers and managers. The CSSP experience confirmed that responsibility for quality clinical care cannot be borne solely by clinicians, and highlighted key areas where improvement in the support clinicians receive is needed. Many barriers to improvement in our complex healthcare system can be removed by recognising the need for accurate data recording and data systems, teamwork, and high-level organisational buy-in, with collaboration between teams and organisations trying to improve the quality of patient care. System-wide improvement has been stimulated and facilitated by the CSSP experience, with mutual flow-on benefits for the activities of the Australian Council for Safety and Quality in Health Care and the National Institute of Clinical Studies.

Towards a Safer Culture: clinical pathways in acute coronary syndromes and stroke.

Towards a Safer Culture (TASC) aims to provide a safer culture in hospital departments by introducing clinical pathways for the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes or stroke. Specific clinical pathways have been implemented for patients with different levels of risk to guide the most appropriate evidence-based medical care for each patient. Pathways facilitate continuity of care across different clinical departments by identifying gaps in care, and clarifying tasks and responsibilities. A multidisciplinary and interdepartmental approach to managing patients is seen as an effective way of effecting change. A system for "point-of-care" data acquisition, a centralised database and web-based reporting enable benchmarking for participating hospitals. A comprehensive range of educational/training strategies is used to facilitate multidisciplinary teamwork and promote clinical leadership. Phase 1 of TASC was successfully piloted at four hospitals in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. TASC is currently being rolled out to 29 hospitals in NSW and three hospitals in Western Australia.

Lessons from the Clinical Support Systems Program: facilitating better practice through leadership and team building.

The increasing array of strategies and models for improving clinical practice and patient outcomes can be confusing for clinicians. The Clinical Support Systems (CSS) model has proved to be effective in local environments because it demystifies the design and implementation of evidence-based practice improvement projects. The CSS model is simple and has a wide scope. It provides a broad framework with minimalist specifications, enabling clinicians to design their own systems of care that cut across fragmented organisational structures. Implementing simple rules can be an effective strategy for change in complex care systems. These rules do not impose solutions on clinicians, but rather, help them to find creative solutions that have meaning for them and are contextually relevant.