Cargando…

Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research

BACKGROUND: Those running well-organised health research systems are likely to be alert for ways in which they might increase the quality of the services they provide and address any problems identified. This is important because the efficiency of the research system can have a major impact on how l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moran, Rebecca, Butt, Jennifer, Heller, Simon, Hinks, Jeremy, Kerridge, Lynn, Samuels, Mark, Hanney, Stephen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6454738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30961621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0433-2
_version_ 1783409600381321216
author Moran, Rebecca
Butt, Jennifer
Heller, Simon
Hinks, Jeremy
Kerridge, Lynn
Samuels, Mark
Hanney, Stephen
author_facet Moran, Rebecca
Butt, Jennifer
Heller, Simon
Hinks, Jeremy
Kerridge, Lynn
Samuels, Mark
Hanney, Stephen
author_sort Moran, Rebecca
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Those running well-organised health research systems are likely to be alert for ways in which they might increase the quality of the services they provide and address any problems identified. This is important because the efficiency of the research system can have a major impact on how long it takes for new treatments to be developed and reach patients. This opinion piece reflects on the experience and learning of the United Kingdom-based National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) when it implemented continuous improvement activity to improve its processes. DISCUSSION: This paper describes the structure and work of the NIHR and why, despite is successes as a health research system and ongoing local continuous improvement, it believed in the value of an organisation-wide continuous improvement activity. It did this by implementing an approach called ‘Push the Pace’. Initially, the organisation focused on reducing the amount of time it took for research to transition from an early concept to evidence that changes lives. This scrutiny enabled the NIHR to realise further areas of improvement it could make – additional goals were increased transparency, process simplification, and improved customer and stakeholder experience. We discuss our experience of Push the Pace with reference to literature on continuous improvement. CONCLUSION: Continuous improvement is a cycle, an activity that is done constantly and over time, rather than an act or linear activity (such as Push the Pace). We believe that the work of Push the Pace has initiated a strong commitment to a culture of continuous improvement in the NIHR. This is significant because culture change is widely recognised as immensely challenging, particularly in such a large and distributed organisation. However, our biggest challenge will be to enable all staff and stakeholders of the NIHR to participate in the continuous improvement cycle.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6454738
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64547382019-04-19 Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research Moran, Rebecca Butt, Jennifer Heller, Simon Hinks, Jeremy Kerridge, Lynn Samuels, Mark Hanney, Stephen Health Res Policy Syst Opinion BACKGROUND: Those running well-organised health research systems are likely to be alert for ways in which they might increase the quality of the services they provide and address any problems identified. This is important because the efficiency of the research system can have a major impact on how long it takes for new treatments to be developed and reach patients. This opinion piece reflects on the experience and learning of the United Kingdom-based National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) when it implemented continuous improvement activity to improve its processes. DISCUSSION: This paper describes the structure and work of the NIHR and why, despite is successes as a health research system and ongoing local continuous improvement, it believed in the value of an organisation-wide continuous improvement activity. It did this by implementing an approach called ‘Push the Pace’. Initially, the organisation focused on reducing the amount of time it took for research to transition from an early concept to evidence that changes lives. This scrutiny enabled the NIHR to realise further areas of improvement it could make – additional goals were increased transparency, process simplification, and improved customer and stakeholder experience. We discuss our experience of Push the Pace with reference to literature on continuous improvement. CONCLUSION: Continuous improvement is a cycle, an activity that is done constantly and over time, rather than an act or linear activity (such as Push the Pace). We believe that the work of Push the Pace has initiated a strong commitment to a culture of continuous improvement in the NIHR. This is significant because culture change is widely recognised as immensely challenging, particularly in such a large and distributed organisation. However, our biggest challenge will be to enable all staff and stakeholders of the NIHR to participate in the continuous improvement cycle. BioMed Central 2019-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6454738/ /pubmed/30961621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0433-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Opinion
Moran, Rebecca
Butt, Jennifer
Heller, Simon
Hinks, Jeremy
Kerridge, Lynn
Samuels, Mark
Hanney, Stephen
Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research
title Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research
title_full Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research
title_fullStr Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research
title_full_unstemmed Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research
title_short Health research systems in change: the case of ‘Push the Pace’ in the National Institute for Health Research
title_sort health research systems in change: the case of ‘push the pace’ in the national institute for health research
topic Opinion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6454738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30961621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0433-2
work_keys_str_mv AT moranrebecca healthresearchsystemsinchangethecaseofpushthepaceinthenationalinstituteforhealthresearch
AT buttjennifer healthresearchsystemsinchangethecaseofpushthepaceinthenationalinstituteforhealthresearch
AT hellersimon healthresearchsystemsinchangethecaseofpushthepaceinthenationalinstituteforhealthresearch
AT hinksjeremy healthresearchsystemsinchangethecaseofpushthepaceinthenationalinstituteforhealthresearch
AT kerridgelynn healthresearchsystemsinchangethecaseofpushthepaceinthenationalinstituteforhealthresearch
AT samuelsmark healthresearchsystemsinchangethecaseofpushthepaceinthenationalinstituteforhealthresearch
AT hanneystephen healthresearchsystemsinchangethecaseofpushthepaceinthenationalinstituteforhealthresearch