Facility Engagement: Relationships drive change

Issue: BCMJ, vol. 60 , No. 3 , April 2018 , Pages 168 News

The Facility Engagement Initiative continues to gain momentum with 69 hospital-based physician groups now organized and leading more than 500 projects across BC. So what is energizing this activity?

Mainly, it’s relationships. My father, who was an obstetrician, worked at the tertiary care teaching hospital in Edmonton. He used to say he would not infrequently see Dr Snell—the CEO of the hospital at the time—in the hallway. If there was an issue to discuss, the two of them would just talk about it. 

Today, doctors may never see the CEO or other senior executives. There’s not a one-on-one relationship anymore, for a variety of reasons. The pressure on resources, staff, and the whole system is so much greater. We can’t expect to be able to stop Dr Snell in the hallway and talk to him about our issues. 

As a result, for the past few decades, physicians have felt that they’ve lost their voice. They are not always asked about critical decisions that impact patients. When concerns arise, often physicians don’t know whom to contact in the health authority structure. After asking the same question over and over, nothing changes, and they stop engaging. I experienced this personally, and have heard it consistently in surveys and interviews with hospital-based doctors. 

That’s why we introduced Facility Engagement. It specifically aims to remove this barrier that doctors feel so discouraged about. It encourages health authorities and doctors to talk to each other and build relationships, and gives physicians time and more opportunity to influence decisions affecting their workplace and patient care. 

We’re optimistic that Facility Engagement is creating an environment for change, but it will continue to take effort on the part of physicians and health authorities. 

How will we know if it is working? When doctors are able to prioritize the issues most important to them and discuss them with the health authority, and say, “We’re organized now. We’d like to be involved.” And when the health authority comes to physicians to ask for input about their 10-year plan or important clinical decisions before they make them, and says, “We should talk to these doctors. They know what they’re doing.”

That doesn’t mean that every doctor will get what they want. But if physicians have a chance to weigh in and be involved, we will make some progress. 

We also realize that doctors need to do a better job of talking to each other about their issues. Through this initiative they are doing more of that, and I hear they are enjoying it.

In my previous role as head of surgery, my colleagues and I agreed to reallocate some OR time from one surgical service to another, based on information that we discussed openly. The group that gave up the OR time realized it was not right that cancer patients from the other service were waiting longer than their own patients who had less-serious problems. 

Supported by good information, we simply talked, and our patients benefited, which, in the end, is the whole point.

Facility Engagement is sponsored by the Specialist Services Committee, one of four committees representing a partnership of Doctors of BC and the BC Government. Read more about Facility Engagement progress at www.facilityengagement.ca.
—Sam Bugis, MD
Executive Director, Physician and External Affairs, Doctors of BC

Sam Bugis, MD. Facility Engagement: Relationships drive change. BCMJ, Vol. 60, No. 3, April, 2018, Page(s) 168 - News.



Above is the information needed to cite this article in your paper or presentation. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends the following citation style, which is the now nearly universally accepted citation style for scientific papers:
Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL, Marion DW, Palmer AM, Schiding JK, et al. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:284-7.

About the ICMJE and citation styles

The ICMJE is small group of editors of general medical journals who first met informally in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 1978 to establish guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to their journals. The group became known as the Vancouver Group. Its requirements for manuscripts, including formats for bibliographic references developed by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), were first published in 1979. The Vancouver Group expanded and evolved into the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which meets annually. The ICMJE created the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals to help authors and editors create and distribute accurate, clear, easily accessible reports of biomedical studies.

An alternate version of ICMJE style is to additionally list the month an issue number, but since most journals use continuous pagination, the shorter form provides sufficient information to locate the reference. The NLM now lists all authors.

BCMJ standard citation style is a slight modification of the ICMJE/NLM style, as follows:

  • Only the first three authors are listed, followed by "et al."
  • There is no period after the journal name.
  • Page numbers are not abbreviated.


For more information on the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, visit www.icmje.org

BCMJ Guidelines for Authors

Leave a Reply