Why is no one talking about generational change in health care? – Texas A&M Stories

Report on Generational Change and its Impact on Sustainable Healthcare Systems

Introduction: Aligning Healthcare Advancement with Sustainable Development Goals

The Texas A&M Institute for Healthcare Access, established in 2023 under the direction of Dr. William Sage, is addressing systemic challenges within healthcare by focusing on the understudied impact of generational change. This initiative directly confronts the core tenets of several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), primarily SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), by seeking to create more equitable, effective, and accessible healthcare systems. The Institute’s work posits that understanding the shifting perspectives of both patients and professionals across five living generations is critical to reforming institutional frameworks and achieving universal health coverage.

Generational Dynamics as a Catalyst for SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

Dr. Sage’s research highlights that entrenched hierarchies and outdated professional norms are significant barriers to innovation in healthcare. This institutional inertia impedes progress toward ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages, as mandated by SDG 3. The differing expectations and experiences of healthcare among various generations necessitate a new approach that moves beyond static, one-size-fits-all models of care.

Overcoming Institutional Barriers to Innovation

A key challenge identified is the traditional deference to senior leadership within the medical field, which can stifle the innovative ideas of younger professionals. This dynamic constrains the evolution of healthcare institutions, working against the objective of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) to build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. Dr. Sage advocates for empowering emerging professionals to collaborate with their peers across disciplines, fostering a more dynamic and responsive system capable of addressing contemporary health challenges.

An Interdisciplinary Strategy for Sustainable Healthcare

The Institute for Healthcare Access has adopted a multi-faceted strategy that integrates research, education, and community engagement. This approach embodies the spirit of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) by fostering collaboration across diverse sectors to achieve sustainable outcomes. The Institute’s work is organized around four key pillars, each contributing to specific SDGs.

Core Focus Areas and SDG Contributions

• Collaborative health policy research: By connecting medical, legal, and social data, the Institute aims to generate evidence-based solutions that improve health outcomes. This work directly supports the targets of SDG 3 and strengthens the capacity for data-driven policymaking, a key component of SDG 17.
• Interdisciplinary health-related education: The Institute promotes cross-departmental education to prepare the next generation of leaders. This aligns with SDG 4 (Quality Education) by equipping students with the skills needed to address complex, interconnected global challenges in health and well-being.
• Place-based clinical and community service: Focusing on service delivery in Fort Worth and surrounding areas, this initiative targets health disparities at the local level. This action is fundamental to achieving SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) by ensuring vulnerable populations have access to essential healthcare services.
• Convenings and communication: By bringing together thought leaders, practitioners, and community members, the Institute facilitates crucial dialogues to overcome stalled conversations. This pillar actively promotes the multi-stakeholder partnerships essential for the successful implementation of all Sustainable Development Goals.

By examining healthcare through the lens of generational change, Texas A&M is pioneering a new framework for conversation and action. This perspective is vital for unlocking progress on multiple SDGs and building a healthcare system that is not only more effective but also more equitable and sustainable for future generations.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article is fundamentally about improving a “broken health care system” and enhancing “health care access.” The entire mission of the Texas A&M Institute for Healthcare Access, as described, is to address challenges within healthcare, which directly aligns with the goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all.
• SDG 4: Quality Education: The article explicitly mentions “Interdisciplinary health-related education” as one of the four key focus areas of the institute. It highlights Dr. Sage’s role as a teacher in both law and medical schools and his use of educational exercises to understand generational shifts, connecting the improvement of healthcare to the training of future professionals.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: The institute’s approach is rooted in collaboration. The article lists “Collaborative health policy research” and “Convenings and communication that bring together thought leaders, practitioners and community members” as core activities. This emphasis on creating multi-stakeholder dialogues and partnerships to solve complex problems is the essence of SDG 17.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all.
   • Explanation: The article’s central theme is the challenge of “health care access.” The institute was launched with a mission to “reframe and reinvigorate stalled conversations around health care access.” This directly corresponds to the target’s aim of ensuring everyone has access to the quality health services they need.
2. Target 4.7: By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles.
   • Explanation: The article describes the institute’s focus on “Interdisciplinary health-related education.” Dr. Sage’s efforts to break down “entrenched hierarchies and rigid professional norms” and encourage students to “talk to your peers in all the relevant professions” are aimed at equipping the next generation of professionals with the collaborative skills needed to build a more sustainable and equitable healthcare system.
3. Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.
   • Explanation: The institute’s strategy is a model of this target. It actively works to create partnerships by focusing on “Collaborative health policy research” and organizing “Convenings and communication that bring together thought leaders, practitioners and community members.” This multi-stakeholder approach is designed to break the “stuck” conversations in healthcare by fostering new collaborations.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• For Target 3.8: The article does not provide quantitative data but implies an indicator through its problem statement. The description of a “broken health care system” and the focus on improving “health care access” suggest that a key measure of progress would be the improvement in access to and quality of healthcare services for the community. The institute’s work on “Place-based clinical and community service in Fort Worth and beyond” provides a direct avenue for measuring this.
• For Target 4.7: An implied indicator is the number and effectiveness of interdisciplinary health-related educational programs. The article states this is a key focus area, so tracking the development of new curricula, cross-departmental collaborations, and the number of students participating in these programs would be a direct measure of progress.
• For Target 17.17: The article implies several indicators related to partnership building. Progress could be measured by the number of collaborative research projects initiated that connect “medical, legal and social data,” and the number of convenings held that successfully “bring together thought leaders, practitioners and community members.”

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: stories.tamu.edu