What it’s all about
The feature most frequently mentioned in benchmarking practice analyses as part of the SWOT survey when it comes to the strengths of doctors and staff is the professional qualifications of the practice owners. However, this view is misleading and can even be dangerous for practice management. Why this is the case and what the consequences are is central to understanding modern practice management.
Basic requirement instead of strength: a paradigm shift
Definition of medical expertise
Medical expertise encompasses the knowledge and skills that doctors need to make diagnoses, carry out treatments and advise patients appropriately. These competences are the foundation of every medical activity and the basis of every practice offer.
Patient expectations
For patients, however, a doctor’s medical competence is a basic expectation and a matter of course, not a speciality. It is the minimum requirement placed on every medical practitioner. Patients assume that a doctor is able to recognise and treat their health problems. This expectation makes it clear that medical expertise should not be understood as a “strength” in the traditional sense.
Misjudgement of one’s own position
If medical expertise is seen as a strength, this automatically leads to a misjudgement of the actual competitive position of a practice. Other, truly differentiating factors such as exceptional service, specialised treatment methods, efficient practice management or communication are undervalued and are not prioritised in the urgency of their design.
The false self-image
This view is also the expression of a traditional and backward-looking image of the profession. It stems from a time when the sole professional qualification of a doctor was considered sufficient to successfully run a practice. However, in today’s healthcare system, which is characterised by patient-centricity, technological progress and intense competition, this view is no longer sufficient. Holding on to such a traditional image prevents doctors from evolving and responding to the changing needs and expectations of their patients. It is therefore important to modernise the professional image of the doctor and promote a more holistic view of the skills and strengths required for success in medical practice today.
The role of best practice practice management
The orientation towards the best practice standard of practice management is helpful here. This validated guideline describes all the regulations, instruments and behaviours that are essential in the areas of practice management, from planning, market research, organisation, management, patient care and marketing to controlling, to ensure that work can continue to function smoothly even under changing requirements. The real strengths of a medical practice come from its implementation.
Conclusion
Viewing medical expertise as a basic requirement and not a strength is essential for practice management. This perspective prevents complacency about qualifications and instead encourages continuous improvement in other critical areas of practice management. Doctors must concentrate on developing genuine unique selling points that can clearly set their practice apart from others. This is the only way to ensure long-term success in an increasingly competitive healthcare market.
Further reading
- Grol, R. (2001). Improving the quality of medical care: building bridges among professional pride, payer profit, and patient satisfaction. JAMA, 286(20), 2578-2585.
- Starfield, B., Shi, L., & Macinko, J. (2005). Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. The Milbank Quarterly, 83(3), 457-502.
- Bodenheimer, T., & Pham, H. H. (2010). Primary care: current problems and proposed solutions. Health Affairs, 29(5), 799-805
- Grumbach, K., & Bodenheimer, T. (2004). Can health care teams improve primary care practice? JAMA, 291(10), 1246-1251.
- Berwick, D. M. (2003). Disseminating innovations in health care. JAMA, 289(15), 1969-1975.
- Mechanic, D., & Rochefort, D. A. (1996). Comparative medical systems. Annual Review of Sociology, 22(1), 239-270.
- Shortell, S. M., & Kaluzny, A. D. (2006). Health care management: organization design and behavior. Cengage Learning.
- Donabedian, A. (1988). The quality of care: how can it be assessed? JAMA, 260(12), 1743-1748.
- Starfield, B. (1998). Primary care: balancing health needs, services, and technology. Oxford University Press.
- Bodenheimer, T., & Sinsky, C. (2014). From triple to quadruple aim: care of the patient requires care of the provider. The Annals of Family Medicine, 12(6), 573-576.
R2049 