TY - JOUR
T1 - Understanding specialist sharing
T2 - A mixed-method exploration in an increasingly price-competitive hospital market
AU - Westra, Daan
AU - Angeli, Federica
AU - Jatautaitė, Evelina
AU - Carree, Martin
AU - Ruwaard, Dirk
PY - 2016/8/1
Y1 - 2016/8/1
N2 - Introduction Medical specialists seem to increasingly work in- and be affiliated to- multiple organizations. We define this phenomenon as specialist sharing. This form of inter-organizational cooperation has received scant scholarly attention. We investigate the extent of- and motives behind- specialist sharing, in the price-competitive hospital market of the Netherlands. Methods A mixed-method was adopted. Social network analysis was used to quantitatively examine the extent of the phenomenon. The affiliations of more than 15,000 medical specialists to any Dutch hospital were transformed into 27 inter-hospital networks, one for each medical specialty, in 2013 and in 2015. Between February 2014 and February 2016, 24 semi-structured interviews with 20 specialists from 13 medical specialties and four hospital executives were conducted to provide in-depth qualitative insights regarding the personal and organizational motives behind the phenomenon. Results Roughly, 20% of all medical specialists are affiliated to multiple hospitals. The phenomenon occurs in all medical specialties and all Dutch hospitals share medical specialists. Rates of specialist sharing have increased significantly between 2013 and 2015 in 14 of the 27 specialties. Personal motives predominantly include learning, efficiency, and financial benefits. Increased workload and discontinuity of care are perceived as potential drawbacks. Hospitals possess the final authority to decide whether and which specialists are shared. Adhering to volume norms and strategic considerations are seen as their main drivers to share specialists. Discussion We conclude that specialist sharing should be interpreted as a form of inter-organizational cooperation between healthcare organizations, facilitating knowledge flow between them. Although quality improvement is an important perceived factor underpinning specialist sharing, evidence of enhanced quality of care is anecdotal. Additionally, the widespread occurrence of the phenomenon and the underlying strategic considerations could pose an antitrust infringement.
AB - Introduction Medical specialists seem to increasingly work in- and be affiliated to- multiple organizations. We define this phenomenon as specialist sharing. This form of inter-organizational cooperation has received scant scholarly attention. We investigate the extent of- and motives behind- specialist sharing, in the price-competitive hospital market of the Netherlands. Methods A mixed-method was adopted. Social network analysis was used to quantitatively examine the extent of the phenomenon. The affiliations of more than 15,000 medical specialists to any Dutch hospital were transformed into 27 inter-hospital networks, one for each medical specialty, in 2013 and in 2015. Between February 2014 and February 2016, 24 semi-structured interviews with 20 specialists from 13 medical specialties and four hospital executives were conducted to provide in-depth qualitative insights regarding the personal and organizational motives behind the phenomenon. Results Roughly, 20% of all medical specialists are affiliated to multiple hospitals. The phenomenon occurs in all medical specialties and all Dutch hospitals share medical specialists. Rates of specialist sharing have increased significantly between 2013 and 2015 in 14 of the 27 specialties. Personal motives predominantly include learning, efficiency, and financial benefits. Increased workload and discontinuity of care are perceived as potential drawbacks. Hospitals possess the final authority to decide whether and which specialists are shared. Adhering to volume norms and strategic considerations are seen as their main drivers to share specialists. Discussion We conclude that specialist sharing should be interpreted as a form of inter-organizational cooperation between healthcare organizations, facilitating knowledge flow between them. Although quality improvement is an important perceived factor underpinning specialist sharing, evidence of enhanced quality of care is anecdotal. Additionally, the widespread occurrence of the phenomenon and the underlying strategic considerations could pose an antitrust infringement.
KW - Antitrust
KW - Collaboration
KW - Healthcare competition
KW - Medical specialists
KW - Quality of care
KW - Social network analysis
KW - Specialist sharing
KW - The Netherlands
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84975855915&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.06.019
DO - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.06.019
M3 - Article
C2 - 27348610
AN - SCOPUS:84975855915
SN - 0277-9536
VL - 162
SP - 133
EP - 142
JO - Social science and medicine
JF - Social science and medicine
ER -
