Quality Improvement (QI) In Healthcare

Introduction

This assignment is all about discussing the detailed aspects of improving the quality in healthcare settings and how the overall concept of quality improvement is necessary for improving the quality of the services provided to the patients and bringing a change in terms of the overall quality of the service. Due to this reason, this paper aims to explore all the ways through which the quality of the healthcare services provided to patients can be improved. Due to this reason, various areas would be considered to explore ways to improve the quality of the services. These areas include exploring the overall concept of quality in the healthcare settings, exploring the strategies through which the healthcare leadership can be improved, the ways of leading the changes, identifying the challenges related to the strategies that can help mitigate the issues, implications for healthcare leadership and many more.  

All these areas are going to be thoroughly discussed and analysed in this context. One of the crucial things is that through the help of the analysis, the solutions can be identified and implemented. Maintaining proper quality in healthcare is highly essential as with the help of this, the overall health outcome of the patients can be improved. Considering various aspects are necessary to increase and improve the overall quality of healthcare services and those are maintaining safeties, hygiene, timeliness, a patient-centred approach and digitalisation (Zamboni et al 2020). Through all these measures, the overall quality of healthcare services can be improved.       

Quality Concepts in Healthcare Settings

The definition of quality in healthcare is quite complicated as it subsumes various multidimensional aspects, which are interlinked in a way that they altogether give the notion of quality of the healthcare services. Quality of healthcare entails more than a unified one-dimensional definition, involving in its concept safety, effectiveness, patients-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency and equity (National Academies of Sciences et al., 2018). All of these dimensions operate as key axes of assessment through which the level of healthcare delivery is set against the prescribed standard, which is synonymous with the holistic approach towards the patient experience.Quality, of which patient safety is the fundamental aspect of healthcare quality, is focused on the minimization of all negative outcomes that may occur to the patients by taking the appropriate prevention measures (Park et al., 2018). While effectiveness has to do with the ability to achieve the expected results by the intervention, as a collective concept of efficiency and relevance, stands for treatments. Patient-centeredness demonstrates the emphasis on the individualization of healthcare services according to patients’ personal requirements and desires, the patient-provider relationship being a collaborative and empathetic one (Mannion and Davies, 2018).Healthcare quality timeliness is composed of promptness and accessibility of services, grasping the fact that time is a very key factor on patients’ outcomes (Tian et al., 2019). Effectiveness provides a pillar on the facet of quality through resource optimization and removal of wastes that hinder care delivery. Equity, as a crucial and central pillar, guarantees equal and unbiased healthcare access for all differentiated by ethnicity, social economic class or culture, thus creating the condition of inclusion (Forde-Gilboe et al., 2018).

The pivotal responsibility of quality in healthcare is conveyed by its deep working ties to patient outcomes and satisfaction (Kruk et al., 2018). The success of health care interventions, the patient- and service-centred approaches, as well as integrating services all together favour the achievement of health outcomes. Patient satisfaction, the principal metric depicting high quality healthcare operations, is subject to coincidence between safety, effectiveness and patient-centeredness, confirming the mutual relationship of quality and the general healthcare experience (Karaca and Durna, 2019).The quality of healthcare is something that is multi-faceted, and therefore the holistic comprehension of quality as a whole is the key in the intricate fabric of health provision. Achievement and accomplishment of these outcomes are contingent upon this factor, which is the lead and guide to the realization of a system that is centred on the patients’ interests, advanced, and the safe one (Bombard et al., 2018). This open-ended idea of quality of care paves the way for other discussions about its historical evolution, frameworks, and the dynamic relationship between quality improvement and leadership within the health care sphere.

Top UK Assignment Cities

The historical flow of healthcare quality initiatives portrays a complex story, concurrent with such societal, technological, and philosophical transitions. The emergence of quality elements into healthcare quality consideration can be traced back to the mid-20th century, which was a decisive period of quality revolution in healthcare delivery (Bond and Drake, 2020). The post- World War II era witnessed the birth of formal quality assurance initiatives propelled by the realization that health care facilities should have streamlined processes and protocols (Brennan, 2020).The features of the time under review are landmark events such as the setting up of the NHS in 1948, that hospitalized health care and made way for a systematic approach to quality assurance (Cohen, 2020). Another significant landmark was seen globally, when in 1965 United States enacted Medicare and Medicaid, led to the rise of the quality metrics, as this programme demanded a standardization of evaluation of the care delivery to ensure responsibility and performance (Brown, 2019).

To some extent, the second half of the twentieth century had witnessed the flourishment of the quality assurance frameworks and the birth of the accreditation systems such as the Joint Commission in the U.S. (Gandhi et al., 2018). This recognition meant that safety and quality practices demanded the abolition of all suboptimal practices and the establishment of standard benchmarks for excellence. The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) which was developed in the UK at the beginning of the 21st century can serve as a contemporary example of this philosophy whilst combining means of financial incentives with performance indicators to drive the pursuit of a constant eradication of weaknesses in primary care (Gillam and Siriwardena, 2018).

The effect of historical events on the healthcare practices of the present is significant, as the principles set down in the past are still the reason for majority of the recommended healthcare practices across the globe (Fábrega, 2022). The impact of quality assurance initiatives is a continuation of rigorous accreditation procedures and evidence-based guidelines as well as the culture of continuous improvement that is the core of healthcare organizations. Based on the above discussion, it can be said that the overall concept of quality in the respective healthcare settings is about the measure through which the healthcare services can be provided to the patients based on their needs with the utmost level of efficiency (Coppola et al 2019). Therefore, it can be said that along with the concepts of safety, effectiveness, timeliness, patient-centredness, equity and efficiency, it can be said that adopting and maintaining digitalisation is also necessary. This can also help the patients to get care at their desired levels (Wyatt et al 2020).

Top UK Assignment Samples

 Adopting digitalisation includes digitally maintaining health registers, using data analytics and many more can help to strengthen the overall quality of the healthcare service. Implementing this can significantly help to ensure the overall continuity of the care. This ends up in providing proper healthcare services to the patients (Wyatt et al 2020). The reason behind this claim is that implementing digitalisation helps to increase the efficiency of communication among patients and physicians, communication between the doctors of different departments, faster diagnosis and many more. In this way, the overall quality of the healthcare service to the patients can be improved.

Service Improvement Strategies in Healthcare Leadership

In this modern era, service improvement is highly effective as it helps the healthcare service providers to provide improved service to the patients. Various strategies are there through the help of which, the overall service quality of care to the patients can be improved (Mortimer et al 2018). These are systematic approach to identify the diseases and diagnose their diseases, developing continuous learning system to analyse the methods of treatment and many more. All these strategies are highly helpful for streamlining the procedures of treatments for the patients. In this way, the overall quality of the service can be improved. 

The continuous improvement loop makes the service improvement a sequential process, thereby, giving hospitals a structured framework for the growth and adaptation in a dynamic healthcare environment.

The improvement of services on the patient outcomes is immense. Healthcare institutions can eliminate medical errors, improve the effectiveness of care provision and increase patient satisfaction by organizing their efforts in a way that targets areas of potential improvement (Mannion and Davies, 2018). This means that reducing waiting times, simplifying appointments scheduling, and improving communication between healthcare providers and patients is the result of service improvement projects; the purpose of which is to make the patient experience more positive (Green et al., 2019). The synergy between service enhancement and organizational excellence is mutual. As healthcare organizations embrace a culture of continuous improvement, they have profound impact on the operational efficiency, financial sustainability, and overall effectiveness of the entire organization (Ng and Luk, 22019). Healthcare institutions enable their agility and responsiveness through an iterative service improvement that takes into consideration the ever-changing patient requirements, regulatory requirements, and technological advancements.

Not only do these benefits go beyond the short-term efficiency, but also, they extend to the organizational performance as a result of improved services. It generates a culture of accountability among healthcare professionals, prompts them to proactively solve problems, and capitalizes on their team efforts, which eventually leads up to the achievement of the primary objective – delivering quality care (Manzoor et al., 2019). This organizational culture will not only be contributing to better patient results but also it allows healthcare companies to gain the status as the leader in medical care provisions. Finally, the remarkability of the service improvement in health care cannot be denied. It acts as a vital catalyst for improving the quality of healthcare, patients’ outcomes being the ultimate beneficiaries and organizational performance the ultimate gain (Green et al., 2019). Through ingrained culture of continuous process improvement, the healthcare organizations will cater to the challenges of the healthcare environment with agility and efficiency which in the end bring the healthcare system to achieve its goal of offering the best care to the patients. With the healthcare landscape continuing to change and the future of healthcare delivery being reshaped around the service delivering, the centrality of service improvement remains important.

Creating measurement and evaluation systems that integrate into strong frameworks, which account for the intricacies of healthcare, is a critical step for determining the quality of healthcare provision. There is a full spectrum of frameworks set up for assessment and improvement of quality, every one differs from another in terms of uniqueness and approach (Tossaint-Schoenmakers et al., 2021). Among the most prominent is the Donabedian Model, which delineates quality into three components: structure, process, and results. In its strengths, it is the holism that addresses the organizational structure, the processes of care delivery, including patient outcomes (McCullough et al., 2023). Nevertheless, the weakness of this approach is that it offers only a retrospective analysis of the problem. It may even, in some cases, slow down the efforts to improve the quality standards in real-time (Endeshaw, 2020).

Get Assignment Help for Top Subjects

The second is Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) Six Aims Framework, furthermore, is significant as it reduces six dimensions to safety, effectiveness, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity (Mortimer et al., 2018). This method is strong upon patient-oriented point of view, is similar in spirit with modern healthcare values, and its integration with national policies has contributed to its progress. Nonetheless, it may prove to be problematic to achieve uniform applicability while covering the different healthcare settings and the focus on equity could collide with systems in practice due to structurally embedded social and economic inequalities (Melnyk et al., 2018).

The Baldrige Performance Excellence Program asks the professionals to collaborate on giving a healthcare solution that is system oriented with quality is specifically implied (Roberts et al., 2020). Its strength is in its combining of performance measurements with organisational strategy, resulting in a culture of continuous improvement. However, this might not be so straightforward in the case of implementation, especially for the small healthcare organizations that lack resources (Ghafoor et al., 2021).With regard to the corresponding measurement models, Quality of Care that is usually used is the model of RAND Corporation which considers quality through the point of view of structure, process, and outcome as the Donabedian one does (RAND, n.d.). Its key strength lies in its incorporation of evidence-based procedures and its flexibility to match diverse clinical settings. Nevertheless, determining common metrics for diverse clinical conditions and, coping with the factors of subjectivity in evaluating some elements of care quality are the questions that must be considered (Uscher-Pines et al., 2020).

They are instrumental notions for assessing quality of healthcare, but these standardizations have their limits. The difficulty lies in the perfect balance between the coverage and actuality (Santan et al., 2018). The application of these frameworks to the complex and dynamic healthcare must be regarded in a nuanced manner with an understanding of their strengths and limitations guiding the practitioners in their application. Aware of the fact that there is no one model that suits every situation, the health organizations usually opt for a combination of them, making such approach very unique for every organization (Greenhalgh et al., 2019).

Noteworthily, the models are not only evaluation tools but they are the means by which the improvement in the service is fast-tracked (Vaughn et al., 2018). The assessment framework that is structured allows healthcare organizations to identify weaknesses, set goals, and implement special intervention measures. Improvement of quality will be adhered to and gradually implemented as the core system which makes all decisions or actions based upon data-driven pragmatic insights.As the quality of healthcare is explored through frameworks and models in estimation, it can be deduced that there is the dynamic interplay of theory and practice involved (Yudkowsky et al., 2019).

Along with all these mentioned models, the management of healthcare organisations needs to utilise the theory of the PDCA cycle to bring the most suitable solutions. This cycle has four stages and those are Plan, Do, Check and Act. In the planning stage, the officials should identify problems and identify the ways for improvements, in the ‘do’ stage, they should test the potential solutions, in the ‘check’ stage, the expected results and actual results of the tests are compared and in the ‘act’ stage, the actual strategies to overcome the issues are implemented (Isniah et al 2020). Going through these stages can help healthcare service providers to mitigate all the issues they face. 

Although these models allow structured appraisal, their potency is mainly seen together with service improvement actions. Awareness of their strengths and weaknesses is a primary feature for healthcare professionals working toward the mission of quality evaluation, in which a culture of constant improvement that corresponds with the principles of top-notch healthcare is reflected.

Integration of quality practices is one of the key issues of the service improvement programs of the healthcare organizations, which should guarantee certain standards of providing care to the patients. The concept of quality, as for example, those supported by the Donabedian Model, composed of dimensions like structure, process and outcomes, lay out a theoretical framework that is used to improve the healthcare delivery (McCullough et al., 2023). Structurally, service enhancement initiatives generally involve the constituting of sound governance systems, allocation of resources and equipment, and standardization of facilities and equipment (Bate and Roberts, 2023). This integration of structural quality dimensions guarantees an adequate basis for delivery of care by enhancing the readiness of the organization to offer quality services in a timely and consistent manner. Service improvement is greatly affected by process-oriented quality systems like Lean and Six Sigma since they are concerned with enhancing the effectiveness of workflow and eliminating waste (Henrique and Godinho Filho, 2020). These methods concentrate on the optimization of the processes to lower mistakes, improve communication and shorten delays in care. The systematic examination and improvement of the medical procedures used while health care is given, the organizations are able to obtain greater accuracy and efficiency in the delivery of their services (McDermott et al., 2022).

Top Dissertation Topics UK

Outcome-focused quality measures focus on evaluating the effectiveness of healthcare interventions on patient health status and their satisfaction with treatment. Service improvement initiatives, outcome-oriented quality measures, and efforts to enhance patient’s outcomes as primary goals, are guided by result-oriented quality measures (Monforto et al., 2020). For example, the significant decrease in the number of hospital-acquired infections, reduced readmission rates, and increased patient-reported outcomes are the factors that allows to consider successful outcome-based quality strategy implementation in healthcare providers activities (Miller et al., 2023). The contributions of quality-focused service improvement to the care of patients are manifold in scope and deep in essence. Patients experience boosts in safety through the decreases in inaccuracies and adverse events (Jackson et al., 2022). The emphasis on patient-centeredness within the quality concepts implies pointing the same at the improvements of service to the patient needs and preferences, which boosts the patient experience (Wong et al., 2020). Timeliness and efficiency gain lead to decrease in expected waiting times and fast access to care, which in turn improves patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes (Santana et al., 2019).

Furthermore, as a cyclical aspect of initiatives for quality-driven service improvement in the healthcare sector, organizations that implement them can respond quickly by evaluating and monitoring challenges accurately, and they can also exploit opportunities through innovations (Bhattacharya et al., 2018). Through the creation of a permanent renovation culture, organizations increase their capacity to flexibly cope with population changes, novel medical technology and updating the received best practices which directly results in the provision of relevant and efficient healthcare services (Fix et al., 2018). In a nutshell, the incorporation of quality notions into the sphere of health service improvement initiatives brings mutual benefits to the standards of patient care within medical institutions. Implementing this system oriented, process and outcome quality measures in a structured way will facilitate distinct improvements in efficiency, safety and patient satisfaction (Santana et al., 2018). This integration not only increases the immediate quality of care but also places health institutions at the edge of the healthcare industry to be able to respond and adapt to the constantly-changing health care landscape.

The significance of technology and innovation in health quality development is paramount as it can fashion remarkable transformations in the scope and standard of healthcare. One of the major areas where technological developments have affected modern healthcare is medical care where it has offered previously unattainable results while at the same time improving effectiveness and establishing high quality of patient care (Weiss et al., 2018). Technology has great impact on the quality of the service by creating an easily accessible way for healthcare professionals to communicate and collaborate, thereby, eliminating the error and speeding the delivery of information to critical portions (Lennox et al., 2018). For instance, Electronic Health Records (EHRs) provide an evidence base for the monitoring of the patients and subsequently enable coordinated, patient-centred care (Xiao et al., 2018). The introduction of broadcast and remote exploration expertise into the system also expands the healthcare accessibility especially in the remote or underprivileged regions, thus contribution to the service range and quality.

In addition, future technological developments such as AI and machine learning algorithms are expected to assist in forecasting the spread of diseases, treatment planning, and individualized medical care provision (Javaid et al., 2022). Such improvements are not only employed for the better service delivery but also serve as a platform for proactive intervention which often lead to better patient outcomes (Panesar, 2019). Nevertheless, the incorporation of technology in the quality of healthcare service is not an easy task and has some ethical issues surrounding it. The possibility of data leakage and privacy permeation has been a serious issue, which obligates the adoption of the advanced cyber security measures to be able to protect patients’ information (Dash et al., 2019). The digital gap that exists when some populations cannot access technology brings up issues of equity, which may cause a situation where existing healthcare differences are made worse. The technological ethics considerations also include the algorithmic bias where AI systems may pass the bias mistakes unwittingly and, in some cases, worse making the already existing health system disparity (Shilo et al., 2020). Finding the balance between predictive analytics and ethical use of decision-support tools to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability becomes a crucial part of the quality quest in healthcare.

Also, the constant progress of technological innovation implies continuous training and re-skilling of healthcare professionals in order to optimize the usage and utility of new technologies (Shilo et al., 2020). These two factors, i.e. resistance to change and the hesitancy of some health care workers in adopting new technologies during implementation, can create challenges which need change management strategies so as to confront resistance and to facilitate a smooth transition. Thus, technology and innovation healthcare quality integration provide a paradigm shift which has unlimited potential in efficiency and patient care (Senthikumar et al., 2018). The possibilities that advanced technology offers in terms of opportunities are unfathomable; however, ethical issues need to be top of mind and proactive measures taken to mitigate challenges if virtuous benefits of technology are to be realized in an ethical, fair and patient centred manner. In the digital age of healthcare, intelligent use of technology represents the fundamental condition of reaching the summit of quality care.

Leading Change in Healthcare: Challenges and Strategies

The global health situation can be defined as a complex and reactive system in which strategic leaders apply their skills to lead their organizations to progressive alterations (Grol and Wensing, 2020). It entails mobilizing shifts in policies, practices, and cultural change with the macro goal of elevating health care delivery, achieving good patient outcomes, and meeting the emerging demands of healthcare (Ginter et al., 2018).Strategies and styles of leadership geared towards the management of change in health care institutions span a wide range of specifically constructed approaches that are adapted to the peculiar problems and diversities of this sector (Alilyyani et al., 2018). Transformational leadership, which is distinguished by the ability to think and to inspire, as well as giving intellectual stimulation, is especially important in forging an innovational and modifiable culture (Alqatawenh, 2018). This kind of style makes healthcare system actors to face change together as a cohesive vision that unites team members in the desire for continuous development (Robbins and Davidhizar, 2020).

Additionally, the use of transactional leadership paradigms, which implies the setting of clear objectives, standards, and metrics of performance, will help create a structured basis for change (Lumbantoruan et al., 2020). Such kind of approach works very well in managing the more specific parts of change, it guarantees accountability as well, and ensures that the individual efforts support the organizational objectives (Purwanto et al., 2020).Nevertheless, facing these challenges is a reality for those leading change in healthcare practitioners’ setups. Whilst the complexity of healthcare systems, the reluctance of stakeholders to change and the need to keep operational continuity vs transformation present some great obstacles (Horstmann and Remdisch, 2019). The colossal web of rules, integration of the myriad hospitals, and the paramount aspect of patients’ safety only increase the difficulty for the challenges that this kind of changes bring.Besides this, healthcare presenting a myriad of professionals each with their own particular understandings, values, and expertise, also requires a more complex human resource (Gifford et al., 2018). Leadership in the healthcare work environments must be able to create an environment that embraces open communication, trust, and takes into account varying perspectives.

Amid these challenges one can find the fields rich in possibilities for great influence. The impact of good leadership in healthcare settings is far-reaching. It produces better patient treatments, improved organizational efficiency, and creates organizations that are pioneers in quality healthcare delivery (Figueroa et al., 2019). Their capacity to cope with the intricacies and the unpredictability within change processes would be a critical success factor for healthcare leaders. They can, therefore, create the much-needed culture of resilience, creativity, and adaptability within their organizations (Bonawitz et al., 2020).Therefore, leading change in healthcare organizations is a complex job which implicates strategic visioning, flexible leadership styles and a deep knowledge of the inherent dilemmas within healthcare settings (Borkowski and Meese, 2020). However, achieving successful healthcare transformation requires the skills to overcome the complexity, that is, increasing effectiveness of healthcare agenda, improving outcomes of the patients, and strengthening the resilience and innovation of healthcare organization (Horstmann and Remdisch, 2019). Although the evolution of healthcare systems is on-going, change leadership will always be a primary role in guiding the hospitals to a future that is celebrated for performance and flexibility.

Incorporating the essential contribution of various healthcare stakeholders into improvement projects in healthcare organizations is not only a procedural requirement, but it is a strategic point of departure which determines the ultimate success and sustainability of improvement projects (Fadda, 2019). The whole range of stakeholders from the healthcare providers, patients, administrators, through to those others that have critical roles to play are made indispensable in taking the service improvement process towards optimal outcomes.An indispensable part among the health workers to compliment the service improvement. By supporting a setting conducive to open communication and interdisciplinary networking, health care providers can utilise their rich skills and experiences to jointly assess areas for improvement, exchange ideas and share best practices, and thus contribute to the quality improvement of healthcare (Rosen et al., 2018). Team meetings which link disciplines, sharing knowledge and continuous learning opportunities find their place among leading priorities in establishing collaboration among healthcare professionals (Park et al., 2018).

Patient involvement stands as a pivotal point in the transformation of healthcare. Patients cease to be passive recipients of care and rather adopt active positions of partners for improvement (Karaca and Durna, 2019). Also, an integration of patient’s ideas into service improvement strategies not only helps ensure that the interventions conform to patient needs and tastes but it also plays a key role in developing a patient-centred healthcare environment (Bombard et al., 2018). Strategies like patient groups, surveys, and focus groups gives ways for patients’ participation which enriches the process of quality improvement impregnating it with in-depth insights of the patients;Administrators, who are strategic decision makers and facilitators, hold the central position in delivering organizational goals together with service improvements initiatives (Bond and Drake, 2020). Leadership that works has to provide an atmosphere where innovation is fostered, that should distribute the resources wisely, and also advocate for a culture of continuous improvement. Strategies that work well for collaboration with administrators are transparency in communication, joint strategic actions, and set of clear specifics on how responsibility is distributed between (Mannion and Davies, 2018).

Stakeholder engagement is a crucial factor in the success of service improvement initiatives and the discourse cannot ignore its impact (Pauly et al., 2018). If people from the healthcare, the patients, and the administrators team up together and their efforts are coordinated they will be more likely to implement the given policies successfully and to keep the improvements going. Stakeholder participation goes beyond the streams of inputs being gathered but also increases the acceptance and adoption of improvement strategies by those in the implementation process (Kruk et al., 2018).In addition to this, stakeholder participation leads to ownership and shared responsibility, so that the aims of providing the modern quality care is on target (Brennan, 2020). This is an all-encompassing strategy which, in addition to the improvement of service enhancement initiatives, contributes to the creation of a culture of continuous improvement where stakeholders are proffered as active movers of the process of the ongoing improvement of healthcare quality.

To sum up, the principle of engaging different stakeholders in the service improvement strategy is a central idea, and this principle would serve as a guide in a quest for maximum healthcare quality. The cooperation among healthcare professionals, patients, and administrators means that only such improvement initiatives that are inclusive, patient-centred, and aligned with organizational goals will be considered effective (Gandhi et al., 2018). Stakeholder engagement does not only improve immediate outcomes but has a much longer-term pervasive effect on the culture of the healthcare institutions, making them adaptable in the dynamic settings that exist today.

Implications for Healthcare Leadership

Both identifying and overcoming obstacles for keeping and modifying healthcare quality are of great importance for improving patient care delivery. This generation of healthcare systems is taking on multifaceted challenges that cover organizations, technologies, and socio-economic structures (Gillam and Siriwardena, 2018). Primarily due to the scarcity of resources which are further aggravated by the increasing cost of healthcare and consequent budgetary limitations, there are difficulties to attain the optimum staffing levels, to acquire latest technologies and to provide the continuing professional development for the healthcare professionals.In addition, the increasing complexity of healthcare delivery owing to the onset of more chronic diseases and an aging population presents hurdles in terms of timely and patient-focused care (Coppola et al., 2019). The intricacies of integrating care across various healthcare settings, facilitating smooth patient flow between providers, and tackle health disparities between the different social groups in the population, certainly, adds more sophistication to the quality improvement landscape (Ghafoor et al., 2021).

This is a clear fact that digitalisation is highly necessary for improving the overall quality of various healthcare services. But, some challenges are also there that are related to technology adaptation. One of the crucial issues is interoperability. This enables healthcare organisations to have access to multiple databases based on which they can have vast amounts of data (Santana et al 2018). This is undoubtedly an advantage, but because of the integration of multiple databases, it poses a threat of potential breach of confidential patient data.  

The intensified telehealth, adoption of artificial intelligence for diagnostics, and the use of health information exchanges are tented to drastically change the healthcare delivery system. Diagnostic platforms, wearable technologies, and remote monitoring technologies offer different ways for proactive and early health management.

To surpass these barriers and stay on top of the forthcoming trends, healthcare systems should require to enact strategic initiatives (Mortimer et al., 2018). Effective data governance mechanisms, connected health information systems, and integration of Artificial Intelligence for decision support are applied technology solutions to technical challenges that increase the precision and efficiency of the care delivery system (Green et al., 2019). Strategic investments in personnel development both for current and future workers, especially through continuous training and education, are the means through which resource challenges can be overcome, ensuring a highly competent health care workforce.Furthermore, inculcating a culture of innovation within health care organizations to embrace new technologies and encouraging collaboration among diverse fields can advance the acceptance of emerging technology and innovations in care (Ng and Luk, 2019). Such initiatives should not be limited to collaboration between public and private sectors, academia and policymakers that would provide the ecosystem for innovation and systemic challenge solving.Therefore, healthcare professionals, leaders and policy makers should take a pre-emptive and the collaboration approach to the issues of quality in healthcare (Manzoor et al., 2019). Techno-investments however coupled with a workforce development, interdisciplinary collaboration whose commitments to ethical standards and patient-centric care can place healthcare system to be able to use wisely the complexities of the emerging healthcare world (Grol and Wensing, 2020). The quest for quality in health care is ever changing and evolve as days go by, hence steadfastness, adaptability, and striving for betterment is of great essence.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be said that the managing body members of healthcare organisations always need to focus on implementing proper measures through which they can be able to implement increased safety systems, maintain timeliness, maintain things like effective management of digitalisation and many more. All these measures can essentially help the providers of healthcare services to increase the level of the quality of their services. Safety measurements can help the patients to receive the treatments in a safe environment. On the other hand, it helps the officials of healthcare organisations to provide treatment in a safe setting that can be effective in improving their reputations in the competitive market. Maintaining timeliness can help patients avoid long waiting times at hospitals and clinics. Lastly, it can be said that digitalisation helps to increase efficiency in all aspects of the service. This means digitalisation increases the quality of communication processes among doctors and patients. At the same time, sometimes based on the nature of the complexities of the health of the patients, doctors need to communicate with the physicians having specialisation in another field of medical science. Digitalisation plays a major role here in this path as it makes it easier for doctors to have effective communication. The patient monitoring process can also be improved through digitalisation. Moreover, it also helps to protect the confidential data of the patients. In these ways, the overall quality of healthcare services can be improved.     

References

Alilyyani, B., Wong, C.A. and Cummings, G., 2018. Antecedents, mediators, and outcomes of authentic leadership in healthcare: A systematic review. International journal of nursing studies, 83, pp.34-64.

Alqatawenh, A.S., 2018. Transformational leadership style and its relationship with change management. Verslas: teorijairpraktika, 19(1), pp.17-24.

Bate, P. and Robert, G., 2023. Bringing user experience to healthcare improvement: the concepts, methods and practices of experience-based design. CRC Press.

Bhattacharyya, O., Blumenthal, D., Stoddard, R., Mansell, L., Mossman, K. and Schneider, E.C., 2018. Redesigning care: adapting new improvement methods to achieve person-centred care. BMJ Quality & Safety.

Bombard, Y., Baker, G.R., Orlando, E., Fancott, C., Bhatia, P., Casalino, S., Onate, K., Denis, J.L. and Pomey, M.P., 2018. Engaging patients to improve quality of care: a systematic review. Implementation Science, 13, pp.1-22.

Bonawitz, K., Wetmore, M., Heisler, M., Dalton, V.K., Damschroder, L.J., Forman, J., Allan, K.R. and Moniz, M.H., 2020. Champions in context: which attributes matter for change efforts in healthcare?.Implementation Science, 15, pp.1-10.

Bond, G.R. and Drake, R.E., 2020. Assessing the fidelity of evidence-based practices: History and current status of a standardized measurement methodology. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 47, pp.874-884.

Borkowski, N. and Meese, K.A., 2020. Organizational behavior in health care. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Brennan, C., 2020. Tracing the History of the Nurse Practitioner Profession in 2020, the Year of the Nurse. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 34(2), pp.83-84.

Brown, E.R., 2019. Medicare and Medicaid: The process, value, and limits of health care reforms. In Readings in the political economy of aging (pp. 117-143). Routledge.

Cohen, S., 2020. The NHS: Britain’s National Health Service, 1948–2020. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Coppola, L., Cianflone, A., Grimaldi, A.M., Incoronato, M., Bevilacqua, P., Messina, F., Baselice, S., Soricelli, A., Mirabelli, P. and Salvatore, M., 2019. Biobanking in health care: evolution and future directions. Journal of translational medicine, 17, pp.1-18.

Dash, S., Shakyawar, S.K., Sharma, M. and Kaushik, S., 2019. Big data in healthcare: management, analysis and future prospects. Journal of big data, 6(1), pp.1-25.

Endeshaw, B., 2020. Healthcare service quality-measurement models: a review. Journal of Health Research, 35(2), pp.106-117.

Fábrega, H., 2022. Evolution of sickness and healing. Univ of California Press.

Fadda, J., 2019. Quality of healthcare: A review of the impact of the hospital physical environment on improving quality of care. In Sustainable Building for a Cleaner Environment: Selected Papers from the World Renewable Energy Network’s Med Green Forum 2017 (pp. 217-253). Springer International Publishing. 

Figueroa, C.A., Harrison, R., Chauhan, A. and Meyer, L., 2019. Priorities and challenges for health leadership and workforce management globally: a rapid review. BMC health services research, 19(1), pp.1-11.

Fix, G.M., VanDeusen Lukas, C., Bolton, R.E., Hill, J.N., Mueller, N., LaVela, S.L. and Bokhour, B.G., 2018. Patient‐centred care is a way of doing things: How healthcare employees conceptualize patient‐centred care. Health Expectations, 21(1), pp.300-307.

FORD‐GILBOE, M.A.R.I.L.Y.N., Wathen, C.N., Varcoe, C., Herbert, C., Jackson, B.E., Lavoie, J.G., Pauly, B., Perrin, N.A., Smye, V., Wallace, B. and Wong, S.T., 2018. How equity‐oriented health care affects health: key mechanisms and implications for primary health care practice and policy. The Milbank Quarterly, 96(4), pp.635-671.

Gandhi, T.K., Kaplan, G.S., Leape, L., Berwick, D.M., Edgman-Levitan, S., Edmondson, A., Meyer, G.S., Michaels, D., Morath, J.M., Vincent, C. and Wachter, R., 2018. Transforming concepts in patient safety: a progress report. BMJ Quality & Safety.

Ghafoor, S., Mann, R.S. and Grigg, N., 2021. The strengths and opportunities for improvement of the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program. Quality Management Journal, 28(3), pp.128-144.

Gifford, W.A., Squires, J.E., Angus, D.E., Ashley, L.A., Brosseau, L., Craik, J.M., Domecq, M.C., Egan, M., Holyoke, P., Juergensen, L. and Wallin, L., 2018. Managerial leadership for research use in nursing and allied health care professions: a systematic review. Implementation Science, 13, pp.1-23.

Gillam, S. and Siriwardena, N., 2018. The Quality and Outcomes Framework: QOF-transforming general practice. CRC Press.

Ginter, P.M., Duncan, W.J. and Swayne, L.E., 2018. The strategic management of health care organizations. John Wiley & Sons.

Green, T., Bonner, A., Teleni, L., Bradford, N., Purtell, L., Douglas, C., Yates, P., MacAndrew, M., Dao, H.Y. and Chan, R.J., 2019. Use and reporting of experience-based codesign studies in the healthcare setting: a systematic review. BMJ quality & safety.

Greenhalgh, T., Hinton, L., Finlay, T., Macfarlane, A., Fahy, N., Clyde, B. and Chant, A., 2019. Frameworks for supporting patient and public involvement in research: systematic review and co‐design pilot. Health expectations, 22(4), pp.785-801.

Grol, R. and Wensing, M., 2020. Implementation of change in healthcare: A complex problem. Improving patient care: The implementation of change in health care, pp.1-20.

Henrique, D.B. and Godinho Filho, M., 2020. A systematic literature review of empirical research in Lean and Six Sigma in healthcare. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 31(3-4), pp.429-449.

Horstmann, D. and Remdisch, S., 2019. Drivers and barriers in the practice of health-specific leadership: A qualitative study in healthcare. Work, 64(2), pp.311-321.

Isniah, S., Purba, H.H. and Debora, F., 2020. Plan do check action (PDCA) method: literature review and research issues. Jurnal Sistem dan Manajemen Industri, 4(1), pp.72-81.

Jackson, J., Ruffini, O., Livet, M. and Urick, B., 2022. Funding community pharmacy dispensing: A qualitative exploration of current and alternate models leading to the development of quality focused funding principles. Health Policy, 126(12), pp.1263-1268.

Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R.P., Suman, R. and Rab, S., 2022. Significance of machine learning in healthcare: Features, pillars and applications. International Journal of Intelligent Networks, 3, pp.58-73.

Karaca, A. and Durna, Z., 2019. Patient satisfaction with the quality of nursing care. Nursing open, 6(2), pp.535-545.

Kruk, M.E., Gage, A.D., Arsenault, C., Jordan, K., Leslie, H.H., Roder-DeWan, S., Adeyi, O., Barker, P., Daelmans, B., Doubova, S.V. and English, M., 2018. High-quality health systems in the Sustainable Development Goals era: time for a revolution. The Lancet global health, 6(11), pp.e1196-e1252.

Lennox, L., Maher, L. and Reed, J., 2018. Navigating the sustainability landscape: a systematic review of sustainability approaches in healthcare. Implementation Science, 13(1), pp.1-17.

Lumbantoruan, S., Kurniawan, L., Christi, A. and Sihombing, J.B., 2020. Impact of transactional leadership style on employee job satisfaction. Journal of Psychology, 8(1), pp.1-8.

Mannion, R. and Davies, H., 2018. Understanding organisational culture for healthcare quality improvement. Bmj, 363.

Mannion, R. and Davies, H., 2018. Understanding organisational culture for healthcare quality improvement. Bmj, 363.

Manzoor, F., Wei, L., Hussain, A., Asif, M. and Shah, S.I.A., 2019. Patient satisfaction with health care services; an application of physician’s behavior as a moderator. International journal of environmental research and public health, 16(18), p.3318.

McCullough, K., Andrew, L., Genoni, A., Dunham, M., Whitehead, L. and Porock, D., 2023. An examination of primary health care nursing service evaluation using the Donabedian model: A systematic review. Research in Nursing & Health, 46(1), pp.159-176.

McDermott, O., Antony, J., Bhat, S., Jayaraman, R., Rosa, A., Marolla, G. and Parida, R., 2022. Lean six sigma in healthcare: a systematic literature review on motivations and benefits. Processes, 10(10), p.1910.

Melnyk, B.M., Gallagher‐Ford, L., Zellefrow, C., Tucker, S., Thomas, B., Sinnott, L.T. and Tan, A., 2018. The first US study on nurses’ evidence‐based practice competencies indicates major deficits that threaten healthcare quality, safety, and patient outcomes. Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 15(1), pp.16-25.

Miller, E., Seddon, D., Toms, G. and Hanson, E., 2023. Talking about what matters: a systematic search and review exploring barriers and facilitators for implementing outcome-focused conversations. International Journal of Care and Caring, 1(aop), pp.1-18.

Monforto, K., Perkel, M., Rust, D., Wildes, R., King, K. and Lebet, R., 2020. Outcome-focused critical care orientation program: From unit based to centralized. Critical care nurse, 40(4), pp.54-64.

Mortimer, F., Isherwood, J., Wilkinson, A. and Vaux, E., 2018. Sustainability in quality improvement: redefining value. Future healthcare journal, 5(2), p.88.

Mortimer, F., Isherwood, J., Wilkinson, A. and Vaux, E., 2018. Sustainability in quality improvement: redefining value. Future healthcare journal, 5(2), p.88.

National Academies of Sciences, Medicine Division, Board on Health Care Services, Board on Global Health and Committee on Improving the Quality of Health Care Globally, 2018. Crossing the global quality chasm: improving health care worldwide.

Ng, J.H. and Luk, B.H., 2019. Patient satisfaction: Concept analysis in the healthcare context. Patient education and counseling, 102(4), pp.790-796.

Panesar, A., 2019. Machine learning and AI for healthcare (pp. 1-73). Coventry, UK: Apress.

Park, M., Lee, M., Jeong, H., Jeong, M. and Go, Y., 2018. Patient-and family-centered care interventions for improving the quality of health care: A review of systematic reviews. International journal of nursing studies, 87, pp.69-83.

Purwanto, A., Bernarto, I., Asbari, M., Wijayanti, L.M. and Hyun, C.C., 2020. Effect of transformational and transactional leadership style on public health centre performance. Journal of Research in Business, Economics, and Education, 2(1).

RAND (n.d.). Quality of Care: in Depth. [online] Available at: https://www.rand.org/health-care/key-topics/quality-of-care/in-depth.html (Accessed: 19-02-2024)

Robbins, B. and Davidhizar, R., 2020. Transformational leadership in health care today. The Health Care Manager, 39(3), pp.117-121.

Roberts, M., Reagan, D.R. and Behringer, B., 2020. Practice Full Report: A Public Health Performance Excellence Improvement Strategy: Diffusion and Adoption of the Baldrige Framework Within Tennessee Department of Health. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 26(1), p.39.

Rosen, M.A., DiazGranados, D., Dietz, A.S., Benishek, L.E., Thompson, D., Pronovost, P.J. and Weaver, S.J., 2018. Teamwork in healthcare: Key discoveries enabling safer, high-quality care. American Psychologist, 73(4), p.433.

Santana, M.J., Ahmed, S., Lorenzetti, D., Jolley, R.J., Manalili, K., Zelinsky, S., Quan, H. and Lu, M., 2019. Measuring patient-centred system performance: a scoping review of patient-centred care quality indicators. BMJ open, 9(1).

Santana, M.J., Manalili, K., Jolley, R.J., Zelinsky, S., Quan, H. and Lu, M., 2018. How to practice person‐centred care: A conceptual framework. Health Expectations, 21(2), pp.429-440.

Santana, M.J., Manalili, K., Jolley, R.J., Zelinsky, S., Quan, H. and Lu, M., 2018. How to practice person‐centred care: A conceptual framework. Health Expectations, 21(2), pp.429-440.

Senthilkumar, S.A., Rai, B.K., Meshram, A.A., Gunasekaran, A. and Chandrakumarmangalam, S., 2018. Big data in healthcare management: a review of literature. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Business, 4(2), pp.57-69.

Shilo, S., Rossman, H. and Segal, E., 2020. Axes of a revolution: challenges and promises of big data in healthcare. Nature medicine, 26(1), pp.29-38.

Tian, S., Yang, W., Le Grange, J.M., Wang, P., Huang, W. and Ye, Z., 2019. Smart healthcare: making medical care more intelligent. Global Health Journal, 3(3), pp.62-65.

Tossaint-Schoenmakers, R., Versluis, A., Chavannes, N., Talboom-Kamp, E. and Kasteleyn, M., 2021. The challenge of integrating eHealth into health care: systematic literature review of the Donabedian model of structure, process, and outcome. Journal of medical Internet research, 23(5), p.e27180.

Uscher-Pines, L., Bouskill, K.E., Sousa, J., Shen, M. and Fischer, S.H., 2020. Experiences of Medicaid programs and health centers in implementing telehealth. Rand Health Quarterly, 8(4).

Vaughn, V.M., Saint, S., Krein, S.L., Forman, J.H., Meddings, J., Ameling, J., Winter, S., Townsend, W. and Chopra, V., 2018. Characteristics of healthcare organisations struggling to improve quality: results from a systematic review of qualitative studies. BMJ quality & safety.

Weiss, D., Rydland, H.T., Øversveen, E., Jensen, M.R., Solhaug, S. and Krokstad, S., 2018. Innovative technologies and social inequalities in health: a scoping review of the literature. PloS one, 13(4), p.e0195447.

Wong, E., Mavondo, F. and Fisher, J., 2020. Patient feedback to improve quality of patient-centred care in public hospitals: a systematic review of the evidence. BMC health services research, 20, pp.1-17.

Wyatt, D., Lampon, S. and McKevitt, C., 2020. Delivering healthcare’s ‘triple aim’: Electronic health records and the health research participant in the UK National Health Service. Sociology of health & illness, 42(6), pp.1312-1327.

Xiao, C., Choi, E. and Sun, J., 2018. Opportunities and challenges in developing deep learning models using electronic health records data: a systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 25(10), pp.1419-1428.

Yudkowsky, R., Park, Y.S. and Downing, S.M. eds., 2019. Assessment in health professions education. Routledge.

Zamboni, K., Baker, U., Tyagi, M., Schellenberg, J., Hill, Z. and Hanson, C., 2020. How and under what circumstances do quality improvement collaboratives lead to better outcomes? A systematic review. Implementation Science, 15, pp.1-20.

Explore Recent Blogs