Skip to main content
Log in

Chirurgie und Management: natürliche Partner

Surgery and management: natural partners

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Chirurg Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Der Begriff des Managements beschreibt die Funktionen Planung, Organisation, Führung und Kontrolle sowie die Personen, die diese Funktionen ausüben. Um eine chirurgische Abteilung effizient und nachhaltig führen zu können, ist es notwendig, dass Chirurgen ab der Ebene des mittleren Managements über Managementqualitäten verfügen und als Führungspersonen agieren können. Durch gutes Management in der Chirurgie lassen sich Komplikationen vermeiden sowie Erlöse und Operationsauslastungen steigern und somit profitable Organisationsstrukturen schaffen.

Abstract

The term management is a description of the functions: planning, organization, leadership and control in institutions and the corresponding persons holding these powers. In order to efficiently lead a department of surgery, surgeons need to possess management qualities and have to be able to act as team leaders. Good management of a surgical department leads to avoidance of complications and increased profits as well as more efficient use of operating room capacities and a better organization within the department.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. Roibins SP, DeCenzo DA, Coulter M (2011) Fundamentals of management. Essential concepts and applications. Pearson Education, Boston

  2. Salfeld, Hehner, Wichels (2009) Modernes Krankenhausmanagement. Springer, Heidelberg

  3. Patel VM, Warren O, Humphris P et al (2010) What does leadership in surgery entail? ANZ J Surg 80:876–883

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Stöver J, Vöpel H (2011) Zukunft von Akutkliniken – Trägerschaft, Finanzierung und Versorgung. HSH Nordbank AG, Hamburg

  5. Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung e. V (2011) Krankenhaus Rating Report 2011. RWI, Essen

  6. Bork U, Koch M, Büchler MW, Weitz J (2010) How much business management does a surgeon need? Chirurg 81:694–700

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jackson RL (2002) The business of surgery: manging the OR as a profit center requires more than just IT. It requires a profit-making mindset, too. Health Manag Technol 23:20–22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Culig MH, Kunkle RF, Frndak DC et al (2011) Improving patient care in cardiac surgery using Toyota production system based methodology. Ann Thorac Surg 91:394–399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nicolay CR, Purkayastha S, Greenhalgh A et al (2011) Systematic review of the application of quality improvement methodologies from the manufacturing industry to surgical healthcare. Br J Surg 99:324–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dimick JB, Weeks WB, Karia RJ et al (2006) Who pays for poor surgical quality? Building a business case for quality improvement. J Am Coll Surg 202:933–937

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Birkmeyer JD, Gust C, Dimick JB et al (2011) Hospital quality and the cost of inpatient surgery in the United States. Ann Surg 255:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Grundmann RT (2009) Lohnt sich Qualität? Ökonomische Betrachtungen zur Patientensicherheit. CHAZ 7/8:393–397

    Google Scholar 

  13. Galbraith JG, Butler JS, Memon AR et al (2011) Cost analysis of a falls-prevention program in an orthopaedic setting. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:3462–3468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tapson VF, Karcher RB, Weeks R (2011) Crew resource management and VTE prophylaxis in surgery: a quality improvement initiative. Am J Med Qual 26:423–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Impellizzeri FM, Bizzini M, Leunig M et al (2009) Money matters: exploiting the data from outcomes research for quality improvement initiatives. Eur Spine J 18(Suppl 3):348–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Frankenberg M v, Schmitz-Winnenthal H, Bornemann T et al (2007) Project „Partnership“ – university surgical departments and hospitals for basic and regular medical care. Directing cooperation for the future. Chirurg 78:368–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Weitz J, Koch M, Friess H, Büchler MW (2004) Impact of volume and specialization for cancer surgery. Dig Surg 21:253–261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bruch HP (2011) Vom Leid der Zinseszinsgeplagten. Passion Chirurgie 1: 02_01

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nöthen M (2009) Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland: Gesundheit auf einen Blick – Ausgabe 2009

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Weitz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bork, U., Koch, M., Büchler, M. et al. Chirurgie und Management: natürliche Partner. Chirurg 83, 356–359 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-011-2227-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-011-2227-0

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation