London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Public Health and Policy, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK.
Soc Sci Med. 2012 Feb;74(3):313-322. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.07.021. Epub 2011 Aug 24.
In England recent health reforms have resulted in a shift of emphasis from targets to outcomes, and to the provision of healthcare by any willing provider. The outcomes described encompass clinical and public service outcomes such as choice and access. The range of organisations providing healthcare services is large and increasing. Whilst many are clearly located in either the public or private sectors, others have features of both public and private organisations, and are not easily characterised as either one or the other. Analytical frameworks are generally underdeveloped, and have not kept pace with changes in organisation forms. This article reviews how public and private organisations have been compared in organisation theory, describes previous work on dimensional publicness in both non-healthcare and healthcare organisations, and presents a publicness grid for hospitals in England. Publicness is defined as a characteristic of an organisation which reflects the extent to which the organisation is influenced by political authority. In establishing a link between publicness and public service outcomes it is suggested that core publicness, dimensional publicness (consisting of political and economic authority) and normative publicness (public sector values) all have to be taken into account, since all have an impact on these outcomes. A framework is described that can be used to map the relationships between public service outcomes and publicness. How the framework can be applied in practice to healthcare organisations is described through the development of appropriate indicators and measures. Publicness theory can help health administrators and researchers understand and better manage public service outcomes. Some of the research questions that might be addressed using this approach are considered. Further development of the publicness concept in healthcare is advocated.
在英国,最近的卫生改革已经将重点从目标转移到结果,以及由任何愿意提供服务的提供者提供医疗保健。所描述的结果包括临床和公共服务结果,如选择和获得。提供医疗保健服务的组织范围广泛且不断扩大。虽然许多组织显然位于公共部门或私营部门,但其他组织则具有公共部门和私营部门组织的特征,并且不容易被定性为其中之一或另一个。分析框架通常不够发达,并且没有跟上组织形式的变化。本文回顾了在组织理论中如何比较公共组织和私营组织,描述了之前在非医疗保健和医疗保健组织中关于维度公共性的工作,并提出了英格兰医院的公共性网格。公共性被定义为反映组织受政治权力影响程度的组织特征。在将公共性与公共服务结果联系起来时,有人建议必须考虑核心公共性、维度公共性(包括政治和经济权力)和规范公共性(公共部门价值观),因为所有这些都对这些结果产生影响。描述了一个可以用来映射公共服务结果和公共性之间关系的框架。通过开发适当的指标和措施,描述了该框架如何在医疗保健组织的实践中应用。公共性理论可以帮助卫生管理人员和研究人员理解和更好地管理公共服务结果。考虑了使用这种方法可以解决的一些研究问题。提倡在医疗保健中进一步发展公共性概念。