ArticleJournal of health services research & policy2022
Loss associated with subtractive health service change: The case of specialist cancer centralization in England.
Article in Journal of health services research & policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anticipated effects of centralising complex gastrointestinal surgery in a rural area in Germany - perspective of health professionals: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- [Effects of new minimum volume standards in visceral surgery on healthcare in Brandenburg, Germany, from the perspective of healthcare providers].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Navigating the micro-politics of major system change: The implementation of Sustainability Transformation Partnerships in the English health and care system.Journal of health services research & policy · 2023Article
- The Pervasiveness of Power: Dilemmas for Researchers of Major System Change in Healthcare Comment on "'Attending to History' in Major System Change in Healthcare in England: Specialist Cancer Surgery Service Reconfiguration".International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Major System Change in Specialist Cancer Surgery in London, England, Using Linked Patient-Level Electronic Health Records and Difference-in-Differences Analysis.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMajor system change can be stressful for staff involved and can result in 'subtractive change' - that is, when a part of the work environment is removed or ceases to exist. Little is known about the response to loss of activity resulting from such changes. Our aim was to understand perceptions of loss in response to centralization of cancer services in England, where 12 sites offering specialist surgery were reduced to four, and to understand the impact of leadership and management on enabling or hampering coping strategies associated with that loss.
methodsWe analysed 115 interviews with clinical, nursing and managerial staff from oesophago-gastric, prostate/bladder and renal cancer services in London and West Essex. In addition, we used 134 hours of observational data and analysis from over 100 documents to contextualize and to interpret the interview data. We performed a thematic analysis drawing on stress-coping theory and organizational change.
resultsStaff perceived that, during centralization, sites were devalued as the sites lost surgical activity, skills and experienced teams. Staff members believed that there were long-term implications for this loss, such as in retaining high-calibre staff, attracting trainees and maintaining autonomy. Emotional repercussions for staff included perceived loss of status and motivation. To mitigate these losses, leaders in the centralization process put in place some instrumental measures, such as joint contracting, surgical skill development opportunities and trainee rotation. However, these measures were undermined by patchy implementation and negative impacts on some individuals (e.g. increased workload or travel time). Relatively little emotional support was perceived to be offered. Leaders sometimes characterized adverse emotional reactions to the centralization as resistance, to be overcome through persuasion and appeals to the success of the new system.
conclusionsLarge-scale reorganizations are likely to provoke a high degree of emotion and perceptions of loss. Resources to foster coping and resilience should be made available to all organizations within the system as they go through major change.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.