| Future directions for academic practice plans: thoughts on organization and management from Johns Hopkins University and the University of Pennsylvania. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 14604872 Owner: NLM Status: MEDLINE |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
Academic practice plans have been challenged in recent years by increasing pressures for productivity and financial performance. Most practice plans began as relatively loose affiliations among the clinical departments associated with their respective medical schools, and such approaches were adequate in an earlier era. However, this model is not well suited to deal with the current and future challenges that face the practice plans, hospitals, and medical schools that comprise our academic medical centers. The current clinical, financial, and regulatory environment requires highly effective business management, a shared commitment to common goals, and meticulous attention to regulatory compliance. In turn, the organizational structures, daily management, and overall governance of academic practice plans must be revised to address these new expectations. The business, clinical, and academic performance of the individual practices must be aligned to meet the diverse, and sometimes conflicting, needs of the academic health center. Both Johns Hopkins Medicine and the University of Pennsylvania (Penn Medicine) have been addressing these issues independently, but their approaches share many common principles. Among others, these principles include (a) organizational alignment, (b) strong practice plan business management, (c) shared resources and strategies, (d) accountability for performance in each practice based on credible data generated by the practice plan, (e) uniform audit and compliance standards, and (f) application of market strategy principles to assure the right mix of primary and specialist physicians, and appropriate incentive-based compensation for physicians. The application of these approaches at two academic health centers, and the rationale for these approaches, are discussed in detail. |
| | |
Authors:
|
David E Longnecker; Douglas E Henson; Kenneth Wilczek; Janet L Wray; Edward D Miller |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges Volume: 78 ISSN: 1040-2446 ISO Abbreviation: Acad Med Publication Date: 2003 Nov |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2003-11-07 Completed Date: 2003-11-26 Revised Date: 2004-11-17 |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 8904605 Medline TA: Acad Med Country: United States |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 1130-43 Citation Subset: AIM; IM |
Affiliation:
|
University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia 19104-4385, USA. delongnecker@uphs.upenn.edu |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
Cost Sharing Hospitals, University / organization & administration*, trends Humans Maryland Medical Audit Organizational Case Studies Organizational Innovation Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)* Pennsylvania Schools, Medical / organization & administration*, trends |
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Ten-year experience with mission-based budgeting in the faculty of medicine of Dalhousie University.
Next Document: How private colleges of osteopathic medicine reinvented themselves.