OBJECTIVES: To explore strategies used by clinical programs to justify operations to decision-makers using the example of the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP), an evidence-based, cost-effective program to improve care for hospitalized older adults. DESIGN: Qualitative study design using 62 in-depth, semistructured interviews conducted with HELP staff members and hospital administrators between September 2008 and August 2009. SETTING: Nineteen HELP sites in hospitals across the United States and Canada that had been recruiting patients for at least 6 months. PARTICIPANTS: HELP staff and hospital administrators. MEASUREMENTS: Participant experiences sustaining the program in the face of actual or perceived financial threats, with a focus on factors they believe are effective in justifying the program to decision-makers in the hospital or health system. RESULTS: Using the constant comparative method, a standard qualitative analysis technique, three major themes were identified across interviews. Each focuses on a strategy for successfully justifying the program and securing funds for continued operations: interact meaningfully with decision-makers, including formal presentations that showcase operational successes and informal means that highlight the benefits of HELP to the hospital or health system; document day-to-day, operational successes in metrics that resonate with decision-maker priorities; and garner support from influential hospital staff that feed into administrative decision-making, particularly nurses and physicians. CONCLUSION: As clinical programs face financially challenging times, it is important to find effective ways to justify their operations to decision-makers. Strategies described here may help clinically effective and cost-effective programs sustain themselves and thus may help improve care in their institutions.
OBJECTIVES: To explore strategies used by clinical programs to justify operations to decision-makers using the example of the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP), an evidence-based, cost-effective program to improve care for hospitalized older adults. DESIGN: Qualitative study design using 62 in-depth, semistructured interviews conducted with HELP staff members and hospital administrators between September 2008 and August 2009. SETTING: Nineteen HELP sites in hospitals across the United States and Canada that had been recruiting patients for at least 6 months. PARTICIPANTS: HELP staff and hospital administrators. MEASUREMENTS: Participant experiences sustaining the program in the face of actual or perceived financial threats, with a focus on factors they believe are effective in justifying the program to decision-makers in the hospital or health system. RESULTS: Using the constant comparative method, a standard qualitative analysis technique, three major themes were identified across interviews. Each focuses on a strategy for successfully justifying the program and securing funds for continued operations: interact meaningfully with decision-makers, including formal presentations that showcase operational successes and informal means that highlight the benefits of HELP to the hospital or health system; document day-to-day, operational successes in metrics that resonate with decision-maker priorities; and garner support from influential hospital staff that feed into administrative decision-making, particularly nurses and physicians. CONCLUSION: As clinical programs face financially challenging times, it is important to find effective ways to justify their operations to decision-makers. Strategies described here may help clinically effective and cost-effective programs sustain themselves and thus may help improve care in their institutions.
Authors: Elizabeth H Bradley; Eric S Holmboe; Jennifer A Mattera; Sarah A Roumanis; Martha J Radford; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: J Healthc Manag Date: 2003 Jan-Feb
Authors: Elizabeth H Bradley; Tashonna R Webster; Dorothy Baker; Mark Schlesinger; Sharon K Inouye Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Elizabeth H Bradley; Mark Schlesinger; Tashonna R Webster; Dorothy Baker; Sharon K Inouye Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: J Randall Curtis; Deborah J Cook; Richard J Wall; Derek C Angus; Julian Bion; Robert Kacmarek; Sandra L Kane-Gill; Karin T Kirchhoff; Mitchell Levy; Pamela H Mitchell; Rui Moreno; Peter Pronovost; Kathleen Puntillo Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Fred H Rubin; Jennifer T Williams; Dianne A Lescisin; William J Mook; Shuja Hassan; Sharon K Inouye Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: S K Inouye; S T Bogardus; P A Charpentier; L Leo-Summers; D Acampora; T R Holford; L M Cooney Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-03-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Eli N Perencevich; Patricia W Stone; Sharon B Wright; Yehuda Carmeli; David N Fisman; Sara E Cosgrove Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Tammy T Hshieh; Tinghan Yang; Sarah L Gartaganis; Jirong Yue; Sharon K Inouye Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2018-06-26 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Mary Godfrey; Jane Smith; John Green; Francine Cheater; Sharon K Inouye; John B Young Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-09-03 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Elizabeth Capezuti; Marie Boltz; Daniel Cline; Victoria Vaughn Dickson; Marie-Claire Rosenberg; Laura Wagner; Joseph Shuluk; Cindy Nigolian Journal: J Clin Nurs Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 3.036
Authors: John Young; Francine Cheater; Michelle Collinson; Marie Fletcher; Anne Forster; Mary Godfrey; John Green; Shamaila Anwar; Suzanne Hartley; Claire Hulme; Sharon K Inouye; David Meads; Gillian Santorelli; Najma Siddiqi; Jane Smith; Elizabeth Teale; Amanda J Farrin Journal: Trials Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Éidín Ní Shé; Fiona Keogan; Eilish McAuliffe; Diarmuid O'Shea; Mary McCarthy; Rosa McNamara; Marie Therese Cooney Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 3.390