Outcomes and Impact of Training and Development in Health Management and Leadership in Relation to Competence in Role: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review Protocol

Document Type : Study Protocol

Authors

1 Health Systems Section, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

2 Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

3 Department of Public Health, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia

Abstract

Background
The need for competence training and development in health management and leadership workforces has been emphasised. However, evidence of the outcomes and impact of such training and development has not been systematically assessed. The aim of this review is to synthesise the available evidence of the outcomes and impact of training and development in relation to the competence of health management and leadership workforces. This is with a view to enhancing the development of evidence-informed programmes to improve competence.
 
Methods and Analysis
A systematic review will be undertaken using a mixed-methods research synthesis to identify, assess and synthesise relevant empirical studies. We will search relevant electronic databases and other sources for eligible studies. The eligibility of studies for inclusion will be assessed independently by two review authors. Similarly, the methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed independently by two review authors using appropriate validated instruments. Data from qualitative studies will be synthesised using thematic analysis. For quantitative studies, appropriate effect size estimate will be calculated for each of the interventions. Where studies are sufficiently similar, their findings will be combined in meta-analyses or meta-syntheses. Findings from quantitative syntheses will be converted into textual descriptions (qualitative themes) using Bayesian method. Textual descriptions and results of the initial qualitative syntheses that are mutually compatible will be combined in mixed-methods syntheses.
 
Discussion
The outcome of data collection and analysis will lead, first, to a descriptive account of training and development programmes used to improve the competence of health management and leadership workforces and the acceptability of such programmes to participants. Secondly, the outcomes and impact of such programmes in relation to participants’ competence as well as individual and organisational performance will be identified. If possible, the relationship between health contexts and the interventions required to improve management and leadership competence will be examined.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Liang Z, Short SD, Brown CR. Senior health managers in the new era: changing roles and competencies in the 1990s and early 21st century. J Health Adm Educ. 2006;23(3):281-301.
  2. Liang Z, Howard PF, Koh LC, Leggat S. Competency requirements for middle and senior managers in community health services. Aust J Prim Health. 2013;19(3):256-263. doi:10.1071/py12041
  3. Liang Z, Leggat SG, Howard PF, Koh L. What makes a hospital manager competent at the middle and senior levels? Aust Health Rev. 2013;37(5):566-573. doi:10.1071/ah12004
  4. Landry AY, Stowe M, Haefner J. Competency assessment and development among health-care leaders: Results of a cross-sectional survey. Health Serv Manage Res. 2012;25(2):78-86. doi:10.1258/hsmr.2012.012012
  5. Sandelowski M, Leeman J, Knafl K, Crandell JL. Text-in-context: A method for extracting findings in mixed-methods mixed research synthesis studies. J Adv Nurs. 2013;69(6):1428-1437. doi:10.1111/jan.12000
  6. Crandell JL, Voils CI, Chang Y, Sandelowski M. Bayesian data augmentation methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research findings. Qual Quant. 2011;45(3):653-669. doi:10.1007/s11135-010-9375-z
  7. Centre for Nonprofit Management. What is the difference between process, outcome and impact evaluations? http://www:http://nonprofitanswerguide.org/faq/evaluation/difference-between-process-outcome-and-impact-evaluations/. Updated 2016. Accessed September 28, 2016.
  8. Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP). Quality assessment tool for Quantitative studies. http://www.ephpp.ca/tools.html. Updated 2009. Accessed April 12, 2015.
  9. Qualitative research checklist. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme website. http://www.casp-uk.net/#!checklists/cb36. Updated 2013. Accessed June 23, 2015.
  10. Thomas j, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:45. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-45

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 21 March 2016
  • Revise Date: 08 October 2016
  • Accept Date: 09 October 2016
  • First Publish Date: 01 December 2016

Share

How to cite

Statistics