Cargando…

Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care

BACKGROUND: Access to health care is an essential health policy issue. In several countries, waiting time guarantees mandate set time limits for assessment and treatment. High-quality waiting time data are necessary to evaluate and improve waiting times. This study’s aim was to investigate health ca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ebbevi, David, Hasson, Henna, Lönnroth, Knut, Augustsson, Hanna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8478272/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34583698
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07021-y
_version_ 1784576021317550080
author Ebbevi, David
Hasson, Henna
Lönnroth, Knut
Augustsson, Hanna
author_facet Ebbevi, David
Hasson, Henna
Lönnroth, Knut
Augustsson, Hanna
author_sort Ebbevi, David
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Access to health care is an essential health policy issue. In several countries, waiting time guarantees mandate set time limits for assessment and treatment. High-quality waiting time data are necessary to evaluate and improve waiting times. This study’s aim was to investigate health care providers and administrative management professionals’ perceptions of validity and usefulness of waiting time reporting in specialist care. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews (n = 28) were conducted with administrative management and care professionals (line managers and care providers) in specialized clinics in the Stockholm Region, Sweden. Clinic-specific data from the waiting time registry was used in the care provider interviews to assess face validity. Clinics were purposefully sampled for maximum variation in complexity of care, volume of production, geographical location, private or public ownership, and local waiting times. Thematic analysis was used. RESULTS: The waiting time registry was perceived to have low validity and usefulness. Perceived validity and usefulness were interconnected, with mechanisms that reinforced the connection. Structural and cognitive barriers to validity included technical and procedural errors, errors caused by role division, misinterpretation of guidelines, diverging interpretations of nonregulated cases and extensive willful manipulation of data. CONCLUSIONS: We identify four misconceptions underpinning the current waiting time reporting system: passive dissemination of guidelines is sufficient as implemented, cognitive load of care providers to report waiting times is negligible, soft-law regulation and presentation of outcome data is sufficient to drive improvement, and self-reported data linked to incentives poses a low risk of data corruption. To counter low validity and usefulness, we propose the following for policy makers and administrative management when developing and implementing waiting time monitoring: communicate guidelines with instructions for operationalization, address barriers to implementation, ensure quality through monitoring of implementation and adherence to guidelines, develop IT ontology together with professionals, avoid parallel measurement infrastructures, ensure waiting times are presented to suit management needs, provide timely waiting time data, enable the study of single cases, minimize manual data entry, and perform spot-checks or external validity checks. Several of these strategies should be transferable to waiting time monitoring in other contexts. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07021-y.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8478272
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84782722021-09-29 Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care Ebbevi, David Hasson, Henna Lönnroth, Knut Augustsson, Hanna BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: Access to health care is an essential health policy issue. In several countries, waiting time guarantees mandate set time limits for assessment and treatment. High-quality waiting time data are necessary to evaluate and improve waiting times. This study’s aim was to investigate health care providers and administrative management professionals’ perceptions of validity and usefulness of waiting time reporting in specialist care. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews (n = 28) were conducted with administrative management and care professionals (line managers and care providers) in specialized clinics in the Stockholm Region, Sweden. Clinic-specific data from the waiting time registry was used in the care provider interviews to assess face validity. Clinics were purposefully sampled for maximum variation in complexity of care, volume of production, geographical location, private or public ownership, and local waiting times. Thematic analysis was used. RESULTS: The waiting time registry was perceived to have low validity and usefulness. Perceived validity and usefulness were interconnected, with mechanisms that reinforced the connection. Structural and cognitive barriers to validity included technical and procedural errors, errors caused by role division, misinterpretation of guidelines, diverging interpretations of nonregulated cases and extensive willful manipulation of data. CONCLUSIONS: We identify four misconceptions underpinning the current waiting time reporting system: passive dissemination of guidelines is sufficient as implemented, cognitive load of care providers to report waiting times is negligible, soft-law regulation and presentation of outcome data is sufficient to drive improvement, and self-reported data linked to incentives poses a low risk of data corruption. To counter low validity and usefulness, we propose the following for policy makers and administrative management when developing and implementing waiting time monitoring: communicate guidelines with instructions for operationalization, address barriers to implementation, ensure quality through monitoring of implementation and adherence to guidelines, develop IT ontology together with professionals, avoid parallel measurement infrastructures, ensure waiting times are presented to suit management needs, provide timely waiting time data, enable the study of single cases, minimize manual data entry, and perform spot-checks or external validity checks. Several of these strategies should be transferable to waiting time monitoring in other contexts. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07021-y. BioMed Central 2021-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8478272/ /pubmed/34583698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07021-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Ebbevi, David
Hasson, Henna
Lönnroth, Knut
Augustsson, Hanna
Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care
title Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care
title_full Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care
title_fullStr Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care
title_full_unstemmed Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care
title_short Challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in Swedish specialist care
title_sort challenges to ensuring valid and useful waiting time monitoring – a qualitative study in swedish specialist care
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8478272/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34583698
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07021-y
work_keys_str_mv AT ebbevidavid challengestoensuringvalidandusefulwaitingtimemonitoringaqualitativestudyinswedishspecialistcare
AT hassonhenna challengestoensuringvalidandusefulwaitingtimemonitoringaqualitativestudyinswedishspecialistcare
AT lonnrothknut challengestoensuringvalidandusefulwaitingtimemonitoringaqualitativestudyinswedishspecialistcare
AT augustssonhanna challengestoensuringvalidandusefulwaitingtimemonitoringaqualitativestudyinswedishspecialistcare