PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2011). National Health Leadership Survey on Performance and Quality Improvement. Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.chsrf.ca/Libraries/CEO_Forum_files/National_Health_Leadership_Survey_on_Performance_and_Quality_Improvement_-_English_-_Feb_17_2011.sflb.ashx.
“Canada spends more than $190 billion annually on healthcare, and healthcare expenditures are rising faster than overall economic growth. At the same time, there is an expectation for increasing demand for healthcare services among the aging baby-boom generation, a shift in focus to person-centred care, a renewed emphasis on patient safety, and ongoing public concerns about wait times and access. These trends, among others, are contributing to greater scrutiny of health system performance and growing concerns about the sustainability of Canada’s universal healthcare system. As a result, there is heightened pressure to identify ways to deliver high quality healthcare in a more cost-effective manner.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) was retained by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF) to conduct a National Health Leadership Survey on Performance and Quality Improvement to:
- Understand what Health Leaders are thinking;
- Identify leaders in healthcare performance and quality improvement in Canada;
- Establish a channel for continued engagement with Health Leaders; and
- Gather insights for use in CHSRF’s programs and events.
Interviews were conducted with 53 Health Leaders from across Canada representing hospitals, regional health authorities, quality councils and government. Below are the key findings, which provide insight into the current status of and opportunities for Canada’s quality agenda:
- Pockets of leadership exist across Canada;
- Knowledge transfer and physician engagement are required to advance the quality agenda;
- A “culture of quality” is needed at the individual, institutional, provincial and national levels;
- There is a need to measure and report on performance and quality outcomes;
- There was agreement on the use of public reporting as an incentive to improve quality and performance, but mixed opinions on the use of personal incentives to advance the quality agenda; and
- There is a need to identify external enablers and infrastructure to facilitate the quality agenda.”