The Impact of Health - Case Study Example

Do inquiries into healthcare organization- Make a Difference? Name Institution 1. Introduction: Health systems are likely to fail at one point or another. This is supposed to raise inquiries from the concerned parties to influence development of some changes in particular clinical governance systems. It is clear that inquiries leads to change in the healthcare, but there has to be some steps taken to follow up on the change activities. The management of the healthcare organization has to be dedicated and committed towards undertaking the required activities in enhancing change of the affected health system. This paper seeks to argue about the impact of health inquiries while answering the question; “Do inquiries into healthcare organization- Make a Difference?” The essay analyses the case associated with Bundaberg inquiry where Dr Javant Patel (Dr. Death) is investigated regarding the death of 87 patients from a public hospital. The essay explores the impact if the investigation in the case and identifies if it led to a difference. http://www.theage.com.au/news/General/The-scandal-of-DrDeath/2005/05/27/1117129900672.html A. The Importance of Health Inquiry Healthy Inquires are inquiries raised because of failure of the health providers to provide the necessary services to the patients, thus compromising patient safety. It is very important to conduct health inquiry because it leads to solving of the adjacent problem and enhancing provision of quality health care. This leads to improvement in patient safety and improved quality of health care (Black, & Mays, 2013). It enhances a chance of identify the specific problem because once a complaint is raised a solution to that complained is identified. Healthy inquiry leads to transparency (Gluyas, Alliex, & Morrison, 2011). The moment a health provider is caught having compromised the safety of a patient and is charged through a court of law, he court requires to know the truth. This leads to improvement of the performance transparency if an inquiry is raised because of lack of openness in the process of offering health care services (Henke, Kelsey, & Whately, 2011). It allows reduction of deviance among the health providers. 2. History of Health Inquiry Healthy inquiries began a long time ago in the 19th century in Wales and England. This is when investigations associated with workhouse infirmaries. According to the argument put forth by Black, & Mays, (2013), the origin of health inquiry began in 1969 in the Ely Hospital, Cardiff, which is a facility offering health care services to people experiencing learning difficulties (Black, & Mays, 2013). In a period of 20 years, there were a number of local inquiries conducted and 15 cases were related to national inquiries from some individual hospitals. Inquiries have been seen fading in fashion from the late 1980s because of establishment of monitoring of the performance and quality of health care offered to the patients. There major omission was identified in 1990s when there was an inquiry associated with ‘paediatric cardiac surgery’. 3. Purpose of inquiry The public because of failure of health care organisations mostly conducts health inquiries. Health inquiries are allayed in order to raise public alarm and to find out the facts associated with individual and organizations’ mode of conducting their behaviour. The inquiries are held to explain the organizational and individual failings in order to improve care standards and for reformation of the healthcare policy (Gluyas, et al. 2011). Governments use the health inquiries to win over their political rivals where they expose the latter’s failings in its governance (Black, & Mays, 2013). The health inquiries are aimed at shaking the particular institution de-freeze the laid management models and practices in order to allow a chance for change. Inquiries allow focusing on the issue and advocating for a change to the suitable body in power (Rivard, Rosen, & Carroll, 2006). After advocating for a change, the institution in question works towards changing its health care policy. It enables the health practitioners to learn from their recklessness. 4. Example: Bundaberg Hospital Inquiry What happened, How it happened , Why did it go undetected for a period of time, Who was involved Dr. Jayant Patel worked in a public hospital located in Queensland and operated on around 867 patients within two years in Bundaberg. There was identification of deaths of eighty-seven patients from the hospital (Morris, 2005). He had operated in Oregon and New York. A number of patients continued suffering from complications after being attended by Dr Patel. This raised a number of inquiries leading to investigation of his legacy. All those who were operated by Dr. Patel has complaints because they suffered from wounds, gait, and weariness, thus being chronically unwell. It is clear that once Dr. Patel operated on a patient, he failed to fix the operation area properly. Majority of the patients operated by Dr. Patel started experiencing complications after surgery, but after seeking for more attention from the health providers, the hospital administration could refer them to Dr. Patel who could not be accessed easily and then he went missing from the hospital without them being attended. The raised cases stayed for a period before being realized because the hospital’s management team covered up Dr. Patel. The bureaucracy of the hospital was malaise, the medical systems could fail, and fraternities failed to raise an alarm. The hospital was struggling in finding expertise and resource to meet the community-increased demand for health care. The more the patients raised complaints and issues to the healthy system in the hospital all was direct to a deaf ear. The government had failed in funding for training of expertise (Morris, 2005). The local politicians failed to help in improving the condition of the hospital. The hospital administrators ignored the warning about Dr. Patel two months after he started his service in the hospital. Dr. Patel, the hospital administrators and the politicians were involved in the issue in question. This is because Dr, Patel was involved directly in operating the dead patients and those who complained of suffering after going through surgery (Gluyas, et al. 2011). In addition, the hospital administration knew about the problem and was warned by senior health practitioners, but ignored the alarm because they were helpless in getting expertise to replace him. The Patel’s boss (Peter Leck) at the hospital approved his air ticket which was one-way to the United States in order for him go and not come back because they know all the accusations that were directed to him and the Oregon and New York cases (Morris, 2005). Leck knew that Patel was no a qualified surgery and did nothing about it. 5. Do inquiries into health organisation make difference? Inquiries into the health organizations advocate for some changes, but they do not actually make differences. This is because once inquiry is raised, a problem is identified and a course of action in looking for evidence and a solution begins. Implementation of the solution depends highly on the rate at which the investigation is conducted (Gluyas, et al. 2011). It is clear that some parties in question because of health system failure tend to go missing and others deny the accusations, thus leading to no change. It is perceptible that when the investigative bodies focus their attention in getting a solution to the issue under inquiry, organizations experience some differences (Black, & Mays, 2013). When the administrators of a health organization are involved in covering up the one in question, the raise inquiries fail to make differences or change the health care system. When there is involvement of corruption in investigation of the inquiries, the inquiries end up being ignored because no change is advocated. A. Impact of Health inquiries Health inquiries have some influence in the management of the health organization or the health provider in question. It is clear that many health inquiries are allayed for the purpose of the public concern (Walshe, & Shortell, 2004). However, it is not possible to find out their value because in most cases an inquiry is raised, there is involvement of delay in the investigation process, hence, and no action is undertaken against the raised issue. There might be policy making aimed at encouraging media and public calls, but it remains unclear if any effective action is taken towards the inquiry. Health inquiries are sometimes costly to conduct the investigation, thus leading to the complainant giving-up (Black, & Mays, 2013). Some involved parties and organizations fail to learn from their negligence, but tend to change their place of location in order to cover-up, thus leading to the inquiries raised having no impact. B. Lessons Learned from Inquiries It is very necessary to raise health inquiries because it shows concern over the issue in the complaint. Ultimately, inquiries advocate for a change of the system policy and if taken seriously, there might be a different in the health organization (Walshe, 2003). People complaining of failure of the health care organisations to offer quality and the necessary health care services to patients raise inquiries. It is clear that some inquiries fail to lead to a difference because they do not fall under an effective investigation process (Henke, et al. 2011). This is because the parties in question tend to cover-up about the raised issue. Inquiries might lead to changes in the health organization where the concerned parties are dealt with by the law where an effective action is taken to make them learn from their negligence (Gluyas, et al. 2011). However, inquiries can endanger the life of the complainant once the party in question tries to cover-up (Walshe, & Shortell, 2004). C. Recommendation It is necessary to conduct health inquiries when there is detection of failure of health system of a health organization in order to enhance improvement of quality of health care services and safety of patients (Walshe, & Shortell, 2004). When a patient or one’s family members or carers raise a health inquiry, it is important for the hospital administrators to take an action and conduct thorough investigation in order to identify the source of the problem and look for a solution (Gluyas, et al. 2011). Health providers, the hospital management and other subordinate staff should not cover-up for negligence of their colleagues, but they should come out and recommend for an action to be taken to bring change (Walshe, 2003). To avoid increase of health inquiries governments and hospital administrators should ensure employment of qualified health providers to conduct particular health care activities (Rivard, et al. 2006). Health providers should not conduct health care services in the fields that they do not have skills and experience about in order to avoid compromising the patient safety (Henke, et al. 2011). It is necessary to ensure staff satisfaction in order to motivate them to offer quality and valuable health care services; hence, avoidance of generation of health inquiries. Health providers should be monitored closely to avoid conduct of negligence when attending patients (Gluyas, et al. 2011). 6. Conclusion It is clear that health inquiries are generated when health organizations fail to offer quality health care services and when there are issues coming up associated with patient safety. Health inquires are supposed to lead to making a difference in health organizations. However, no change or difference is experienced in relation to health inquiries because the health providers in question cover-up the issue. The inquiry of Dr. Patel’s negligence which led to death of 87 patients did not lead to a difference in Bundaberg Base Hospital because Dr. Patel went missing when there were many accusations about his operations to patients. References Black, N. & Mays, N. (2013). Public inquiries into health care in the UK: a sound basis for policy-making? Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 0(0). doi:10.1177/1355819613489545 Gluyas, H., Alliex, S., & Morrison, P. (2011). Do inquiries into health system failures lead to change in clinical government systems?. Elsevier Australia. doi:10.1016/j.colegn.2011.06.001 Henke, N., Kelsey, T. & Whately, H. (2011). Transparency – the most powerful driver of health care improvement? Health International, 11. Morris, A., H. (2005). Submission No. 72. Bundaberg Hospital. http---www.aphref.aph.gov.au-house-committee-haa-.-healthfunding-sub-sub072.pdf Rivard, P. E., Rosen, A. K. & Carroll, J. S. (2006). Enhancing Patient Safety through Organizational Learning: Are Patient Safety Indicators a Step in the Right Direction? Health Research and Educational Trust. HSR: Health Services Research 41:4, DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00569.x Walshe, K. & Shortell, S. M. (2004).When Things Go Wrong: How Health Care Organizations Deal With Major Failures. Health Affairs, 23, no.3: 103-111. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.3.103 Walshe, K. (2003). Understanding and learning from organizational failure. Qual Saf Health Care; 12:81–82 Read More