首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Health, Organization and Management >How healthcare states matter: Comparing the introduction of clinical standards in Britain and Germany
【24h】

How healthcare states matter: Comparing the introduction of clinical standards in Britain and Germany

机译:医疗保健状况如何重要:比较英国和德国引入的临床标准

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose - This paper aims to identify variation in the introduction of New Public Management reforms in healthcare and how this variation is related to country-specific healthcare states. Design/methodology/approach - The analysis uses the introduction of clinical standards in Britain and Germany as cases. The two countries are characterised by interesting differences in relation to the institutional set-up of healthcare states and as such present ideal cases to explore the specific ways of how healthcare states filter clinical standards as tools of a generic managerialism. Findings - Both countries have introduced clinical standards but, importantly, the substantive nature of clinical standards differs, reflecting differences in initial institutional conditions. More specifically, in Britain clinical standards have taken the form of two parallel policies, which strengthen hierarchy-based governing and redefine professional self-regulation. In Germany, by contrast, clinical standards come in one single policy, which strengthens the hybrid of network- and hierarchy-based governing and to some extent also pure hierarchy-based forms of governing. Originality/value - First, with its cross-country comparative focus, the analysis is able to identify systematic variations across healthcare states and the specific ways in which they impact on the introduction of New Public Management. Second, with its focus on clinical standards, the analysis deals with the governance of medical practice as one of the central areas of healthcare states.
机译:目的-本文旨在确定在引入新的医疗保健新公共管理改革中的差异,以及这种差异与特定国家/地区的医疗状况之间的关系。设计/方法/方法-分析以在英国和德国引入临床标准为例。两国的特点是在医疗保健州的机构设置方面存在有趣的差异,因此,这是目前理想的案例,旨在探讨医疗保健州如何过滤临床标准作为通用管理主义工具的具体方式。调查结果-两国都引入了临床标准,但重要的是,临床标准的实质性质有所不同,反映出初始机构条件的差异。更具体地说,在英国,临床标准采取了两种平行政策的形式,这些政策加强了基于等级的管理并重新定义了专业自我调节。相比之下,在德国,临床标准是一项单一政策,它加强了基于网络和基于层次的管理的混合,并在某种程度上也增强了基于层次的纯形式的管理。原创性/价值-首先,通过其跨国比较重点,该分析能够确定医疗保健州之间的系统差异以及它们对采用新公共管理产生影响的特定方式。第二,该分析着重于临床标准,是作为医疗保健州的中心领域之一的医学实践的治理。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号