» Articles » PMID: 39568448

Implementing a Decommissioning Programme in Swedish Healthcare: Experiences of Healthcare Managers

Overview
Publisher Sage Publications
Specialty Health Services
Date 2024 Nov 21
PMID 39568448
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Decommissioning programmes pose a substantial risk of failure compared to other change processes in healthcare. A better understanding of the challenges associated with change processes initiated by resource scarcity faced by healthcare managers is crucial. This study describes and compares department and unit managers' experiences during the implementation of a large-scale decommissioning programme in a Swedish region. A survey was developed and a cross-sectional study was performed, measuring 172 healthcare managers' experiences of (1) the region's leadership, (2) their own participation and (3) their own commitment and responsibility during the implementation of the decommissioning programme. Respondents were 50 department managers and 122 unit managers (93% and 58% response rate, respectively). There was a significant difference between department and unit managers in their experiences of the region's leadership and their own participation in the decommissioning programme. Unit managers were more dissatisfied with the way it developed compared to department managers. For example, unit managers reported a lower level of leadership support, incentives to participate, and that their knowledge and skills were not fully utilised. Involvement of unit managers in a more fruitful way might enhance the results of decommissioning programmes. This study highlights a key actor in this context: the unit manager.

References
1.
Stromberg A, Engstrom M, Hagerman H, Skytt B . First-line managers dealing with different management approaches. Leadersh Health Serv (Bradf Engl). 2019; 32(4):543-557. PMC: 7324079. DOI: 10.1108/LHS-09-2018-0046. View

2.
Harris C, Green S, Ramsey W, Allen K, King R . Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 9: conceptualising disinvestment in the local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; 17(1):633. PMC: 5591535. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2507-6. View

3.
Williams I, Harlock J, Robert G, Kimberly J, Mannion R . Is the end in sight? A study of how and why services are decommissioned in the English National Health Service. Sociol Health Illn. 2021; 43(2):441-458. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.13234. View

4.
Mitchell D, Bowles K, OBrien L, Bardoel A, Haines T . Health care staff responses to disinvestment-A systematic search and qualitative thematic synthesis. Health Care Manage Rev. 2019; 46(1):44-54. DOI: 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000239. View

5.
Waldau S, Lindholm L, Wiechel A . Priority setting in practice: participants opinions on vertical and horizontal priority setting for reallocation. Health Policy. 2010; 96(3):245-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2010.02.007. View