Jenna M. Evans

The Evolution Of Integrated Health Care Strategies

PURPOSE To examine the evolution of health care integration strategies and associated conceptualization and practice through a review and synthesis of over 25 years of international academic research and literature. METHODS A search of the health sciences literature was conducted using PubMed and EMBASE. A total of 114 articles were identified for inclusion and thematically analyzed using a strategy content model for systems-level integration. FINDINGS Six major, inter-related shifts in integration strategies were identified: (1) from a focus on horizontal integration to an emphasis on vertical integration; (2) from acute care and institution-centered models of integration to a broader focus on community-based health and social services; (3) from economic arguments for integration to an emphasis on improving quality of care and creating value; (4) from evaluations of integration using an organizational perspective to an emerging interest in patient-centered measures; (5) from a focus on modifying organizational and environmental structures to an emphasis on changing ways of working and influencing underlying cultural attitudes and norms; and (6) from integration for all patients within defined regions to a strategic focus on integrating care for specific populations. We propose that underlying many of these shifts is a growing recognition of the value of understanding health care delivery and integration as processes situated in Complex-Adaptive Systems (CAS). ORIGINALITY/VALUE This review builds a descriptive framework against which to assess, compare, and track integration strategies over time.

Activating the knowledge-to-action cycle for geriatric care in India

Despite a rapidly aging population, geriatrics - the branch of medicine that focuses on healthcare of the elderly - is relatively new in India, with many practicing physicians having little knowledge of the clinical and functional implications of aging. Negative attitudes and limited awareness, knowledge or acceptance of geriatrics as a legitimate discipline contribute to inaccessible and poor quality care for Indias old. The aim of this paper is to argue that knowledge translation is a potentially effective tool for engaging Indian healthcare providers in the delivery of high quality geriatric care. The paper describes Indias context, including demographics, challenges and current policies, summarizes evidence on provider behaviour change, and integrates the two in order to propose an action plan for promoting improvements in geriatric care.

Outcome mapping for health system integration

Health systems around the world are implementing integrated care strategies to improve quality, reduce or maintain costs, and improve the patient experience. Yet few practical tools exist to aid leaders and managers in building the prerequisites to integrated care, namely a shared vision, clear roles and responsibilities, and a common understanding of how the vision will be realized. Outcome mapping may facilitate stakeholder alignment on the vision, roles, and processes of integrated care delivery via participative and focused dialogue among diverse stakeholders on desired outcomes and enabling actions. In this paper, we describe an outcome-mapping exercise we conducted at a Local Health Integration Network in Ontario, Canada, using consensus development conferences. Our preliminary findings suggest that outcome mapping may help stakeholders make sense of a complex system and foster collaborative capital, a resource that can support information sharing, trust, and coordinated change toward integration across organizational and professional boundaries. Drawing from the theoretical perspectives of complex adaptive systems and collaborative capital, we also outline recommendations for future outcome-mapping exercises. In particular, we emphasize the potential for outcome mapping to be used as a tool not only for identifying and linking strategic outcomes and actions, but also for studying the boundaries, gaps, and ties that characterize social networks across the continuum of care.

A cognitive perspective on health systems integration: results of a Canadian Delphi study

BackgroundOngoing challenges to healthcare integration point toward the need to move beyond structural and process issues. While we know what needs to be done to achieve integrated care, there is little that informs us as to how. We need to understand how diverse organizations and professionals develop shared knowledge and beliefs – that is, we need to generate knowledge about normative integration. We present a cognitive perspective on integration, based on shared mental model theory, that may enhance our understanding and ability to measure and influence normative integration. The aim of this paper is to validate and improve the Mental Models of Integrated Care (MMIC) Framework, which outlines important knowledge and beliefs whose convergence or divergence across stakeholder groups may influence inter-professional and inter-organizational relations.MethodsWe used a two-stage web-based modified Delphi process to test the MMIC Framework against expert opinion using a random sample of participants from Canada’s National Symposium on Integrated Care. Respondents were asked to rate the framework’s clarity, comprehensiveness, usefulness, and importance using seven-point ordinal scales. Spaces for open comments were provided. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the structured responses, while open comments were coded and categorized using thematic analysis. The Kruskall-Wallis test was used to examine cross-group agreement by level of integration experience, current workplace, and current role.ResultsIn the first round, 90 individuals responded (52% response rate), representing a wide range of professional roles and organization types from across the continuum of care. In the second round, 68 individuals responded (75.6% response rate). The quantitative and qualitative feedback from experts was used to revise the framework. The re-named “Integration Mindsets Framework” consists of a Strategy Mental Model and a Relationships Mental Model, comprising a total of nineteen content areas.ConclusionsThe Integration Mindsets Framework draws the attention of researchers and practitioners to how various stakeholders think about and conceptualize integration. A cognitive approach to understanding and measuring normative integration complements dominant cultural approaches and allows for more fine-grained analyses. The framework can be used by managers and leaders to facilitate the interpretation, planning, implementation, management and evaluation of integration initiatives.

Organizational Context and Capabilities for Integrating Care: A Framework for Improvement

Background: Interventions aimed at integrating care have become widespread in healthcare; however, there is significant variability in their success. Differences in organizational contexts and associated capabilities may be responsible for some of this variability. Purpose: This study develops and validates a conceptual framework of organizational capabilities for integrating care, identifies which of these capabilities may be most important, and explores the mechanisms by which they influence integrated care efforts. Methods: The Context and Capabilities for Integrating Care (CCIC) Framework was developed through a literature review, and revised and validated through interviews with leaders and care providers engaged in integrated care networks in Ontario, Canada. Interviews involved open-ended questions and graphic elicitation. Quantitative content analysis was used to summarize the data. Results: The CCIC Framework consists of eighteen organizational factors in three categories: Basic Structures, People and Values, and Key Processes. The three most important capabilities shaping the capacity of organizations to implement integrated care interventions include Leadership Approach, Clinician Engagement and Leadership, and Readiness for Change. The majority of hypothesized relationships among organizational capabilities involved Readiness for Change and Partnering, emphasizing the complexity, interrelatedness and importance of these two factors to integrated care efforts. Conclusions: Organizational leaders can use the framework to determine readiness to integrate care, develop targeted change management strategies, and select appropriate partners with overlapping or complementary profiles on key capabilities. Researchers may use the results to test and refine the proposed framework, with a focus on the hypothesized relationships among organizational capabilities and between organizational capabilities and performance outcomes.

Intellectual capital in the healthcare sector: a systematic review and critique of the literature

BackgroundVariations in the performance of healthcare organizations may be partly explained by differing “stocks” of intellectual capital (IC), and differing approaches and capacities for leveraging IC. This study synthesizes what is currently known about the conceptualization, management and measurement of IC in healthcare through a review of the literature.MethodsPeer-reviewed papers on IC in healthcare published between 1990 and 2014 were identified through searches of five databases using the following key terms: intellectual capital/assets, knowledge capital/assets/resources, and intangible assets/resources. Articles deemed relevant for inclusion underwent systematic data extraction to identify overarching themes and were assessed for their methodological quality.ResultsThirty-seven papers were included in the review. The primary research method used was cross-sectional questionnaires focused on hospital managers’ perceptions of IC, followed by semi-structured interviews and analysis of administrative data. Empirical studies suggest that IC is linked to subjective process and performance indicators in healthcare organizations. Although the literature on IC in healthcare is growing, it is not advanced. In this paper, we identify and examine the conceptual, theoretical and methodological limitations of the literature.ConclusionsThe concept and framework of IC offer a means to study the value of intangible resources in healthcare organizations, how to manage systematically these resources together, and their mutually enhancing interactions on performance. We offer several recommendations for future research.

Organizational Capabilities for Integrating Care: A Review of Measurement Tools

The success of integrated care interventions is highly dependent on the internal and collective capabilities of the organizations in which they are implemented. Yet, organizational capabilities are rarely described, understood, or measured with sufficient depth and breadth in empirical studies or in practice. Assessing these capabilities can contribute to understanding why some integrated care interventions are more effective than others. We identified, organized, and assessed survey instruments that measure the internal and collective organizational capabilities required for integrated care delivery. We conducted an expert consultation and searched Medline and Google Scholar databases for survey instruments measuring factors outlined in the Context and Capabilities for Integrating Care Framework. A total of 58 instruments were included in the review and assessed based on their psychometric properties, practical considerations, and applicability to integrated care efforts. This study provides a bank of psychometrically sound instruments for describing and comparing organizational capabilities. Greater use of these instruments across integrated care interventions and studies can enhance standardized comparative analyses and inform change management. Further research is needed to build an evidence base for these instruments and to explore the associations between organizational capabilities and integrated care processes and outcomes.

Correction: Qualitative analysis of the dynamics of policy design and implementation in hospital funding reform

Background As in many health care systems, some Canadian jurisdictions have begun shifting away from global hospital budgets. Payment for episodes of care has begun to be implemented. Starting in 2012, the Province of Ontario implemented hospital funding reforms comprising three elements: Global Budgets; Health Based Allocation Method (HBAM); and Quality-Based Procedures (QBP). This evaluation focuses on implementation of QBPs, a procedure/diagnosis-specific funding approach involving a pre-set price per episode of care coupled with best practice clinical pathways. We examined whether or not there was consensus in understanding of the program theory underpinning QBPs and how this may have influenced full and effective implementation of this innovative funding model. Methods We undertook a formative evaluation of QBP implementation. We used an embedded case study method and in-depth, one-on-one, semi-structured, telephone interviews with key informants at three levels of the health care system: Designers (those who designed the QBP policy); Adoption Supporters (organizations and individuals supporting adoption of QBPs); and Hospital Implementers (those responsible for QBP implementation in hospitals). Thematic analysis involved an inductive approach, incorporating Framework analysis to generate descriptive and explanatory themes that emerged from the data. Results Five main findings emerged from our research: (1) Unbeknownst to most key informants, there was neither consistency nor clarity over time among QBP designers in their understanding of the original goal(s) for hospital funding reform; (2) Prior to implementation, the intended hospital funding mechanism transitioned from ABF to QBPs, but most key informants were either unaware of the transition or believe it was intentional; (3) Perception of the primary goal(s) of the policy reform continues to vary within and across all levels of key informants; (4) Four years into implementation, the QBP funding mechanism remains misunderstood; and (5) Ongoing differences in understanding of QBP goals and funding mechanism have created challenges with implementation and difficulties in measuring success. Conclusions Policy drift and policy layering affected both the goal and the mechanism of action of hospital funding reform. Lack of early specification in both policy goals and hospital funding mechanism exposed the reform to reactive changes that did not reflect initial intentions. Several challenges further exacerbated implementation of complex hospital funding reforms, including a prolonged implementation schedule, turnover of key staff, and inconsistent messaging over time. These factors altered the trajectory of the hospital funding reforms and created confusion amongst those responsible for implementation. Enacting changes to hospital funding policy through a process that is transparent, collaborative, and intentional may increase the likelihood of achieving intended effects.

Organizational Context Matters: A Research Toolkit for Conducting Standardized Case Studies of Integrated Care Initiatives

Introduction: The variable success of integrated care initiatives has led experts to recommend tailoring design and implementation to the organizational context. Yet, organizational contexts are rarely described, understood, or measured with sufficient depth and breadth in empirical studies or in practice. We thus lack knowledge of when and specifically how organizational contexts matter. To facilitate the accumulation of evidence, we developed a research toolkit for conducting case studies using standardized measures of the (inter-)organizational context for integrating care. Theory and Methods: We used a multi-method approach to develop the research toolkit: (1) development and validation of the Context and Capabilities for Integrating Care (CCIC) Framework, (2) identification, assessment, and selection of survey instruments, (3) development of document review methods, (4) development of interview guide resources, and (5) pilot testing of the document review guidelines, consolidated survey, and interview guide. Results: The toolkit provides a framework and measurement tools that examine 18 organizational and inter-organizational factors that affect the implementation and success of integrated care initiatives. Discussion and Conclusion: The toolkit can be used to characterize and compare organizational contexts across cases and enable comparison of results across studies. This information can enhance our understanding of the influence of organizational contexts, support the transfer of best practices, and help explain why some integrated care initiatives succeed and some fail.

Organizational knowledge and capabilities in healthcare: Deconstructing and integrating diverse perspectives

Diverse concepts and bodies of work exist in the academic literature to guide research and practice on organizational knowledge and capabilities. However, these concepts have largely developed in parallel with minimal cross-fertilization, particularly in the healthcare domain. This contributes to confusion regarding conceptual boundaries and relationships, and to a lack of application of potentially useful evidence. The aim of this article is to assess three concepts associated with organizational knowledge content—intellectual capital, organizational core competencies, and dynamic capabilities—and to propose an agenda for future research. We conducted a literature review to identify and synthesize papers that apply the concepts of intellectual capital, organizational core competencies, and dynamic capabilities in healthcare settings. We explore the meaning of these concepts, summarize and critique associated healthcare research, and propose a high-level framework for conceptualizing how the concepts are related to each other. To support application of the concepts in practice, we conducted a case study of a healthcare organization. Through document review and interviews with current and former leaders, we identify and describe the organization’s intellectual capital, organizational core competencies, and dynamic capabilities. The review demonstrates that efforts to identify, understand, and improve organizational knowledge have been limited in health services research. In the literature on healthcare, we identified 38 papers on intellectual capital, 4 on core competencies, and 5 on dynamic capabilities. We link these disparate fields of inquiry by conceptualizing the three concepts as distinct, but overlapping concepts influenced by broader organizational learning and knowledge management processes. To aid healthcare researchers in studying and applying a knowledge-based view of organizational performance, we propose an agenda for future research involving longitudinal comparative case studies.