Sally K. Holmes

Transformational change in health care systems: an organizational model.

Background: The Institute of Medicines 2001 report Crossing the Quality Chasm argued for fundamental redesign of the U.S. health care system. Six years later, many health care organizations have embraced the reports goals, but few have succeeded in making the substantial transformations needed to achieve those aims. Purposes: This article offers a model for moving organizations from short-term, isolated performance improvements to sustained, reliable, organization-wide, and evidence-based improvements in patient care. Methodology: Longitudinal comparative case studies were conducted in 12 health care systems using a mixed-methods evaluation design based on semistructured interviews and document review. Participating health care systems included seven systems funded through the Robert Wood Johnson Foundations Pursuing Perfection Program and five systems with long-standing commitments to improvement and high-quality care. Findings: Five interactive elements appear critical to successful transformation of patient care: (1) Impetus to transform; (2) Leadership commitment to quality; (3) Improvement initiatives that actively engage staff in meaningful problem solving; (4) Alignment to achieve consistency of organization goals with resource allocation and actions at all levels of the organization; and (5) Integration to bridge traditional intra-organizational boundaries among individual components. These elements drive change by affecting the components of the complex health care organization in which they operate: (1) Mission, vision, and strategies that set its direction and priorities; (2) Culture that reflects its informal values and norms; (3) Operational functions and processes that embody the work done in patient care; and (4) Infrastructure such as information technology and human resources that support the delivery of patient care. Transformation occurs over time with iterative changes being sustained and spread across the organization. Practice Implications: The conceptual model holds promise for guiding health care organizations in their efforts to pursue the Institute of Medicine aims of fundamental system redesign to achieve dramatically improved patient care.

A Survey of Hospital Quality Improvement Activities

Five years after the Institute of Medicine (IOM) called for a redesigned U.S. health care system, relatively little was known about the extent to which hospitals had undertaken quality improvement (QI) efforts to address deficiencies in patient care. To examine the state of hospital QI activities in 2006, the authors designed and conducted a survey of short-term, general hospitals with 25 or more beds. In a sample of 470 hospitals, they found that many were actively engaged in improvement efforts but that these activities varied in method and impact. Hospitals with high levels of perceived quality, as reflected in assessments by their quality managers, were more likely to have embraced QI as a strategic priority, employed quality practices and processes consistent with IOM aims, fostered staff training and involvement in QI methods, engaged in an array of QI activities and clinical QI strategies, and maintained staffing levels favoring fewer patients per nurse.

Strengthening organizations to implement evidence-based clinical practices.

OBJECTIVES Despite recognition that implementation of evidence-based clinical practices (EBPs) usually depends on the structure and processes of the larger health care organizational context, the dynamics of implementation are not well understood. This projects aim was to deepen that understanding by implementing and evaluating an organizational model hypothesized to strengthen the ability of health care organizations to facilitate EBPs. CONCEPTUAL MODEL: The model posits that implementation of EBPs will be enhanced through the presence of three interacting components: active leadership commitment to quality, robust clinical process redesign incorporating EBPs into routine operations, and use of management structures and processes to support and align redesign. STUDY DESIGN In a mixed-methods longitudinal comparative case study design, seven medical centers in one network in the Department of Veterans Affairs participated in an intervention to implement the organizational model over 3 years. The network was selected randomly from three interested in using the model. The target EBP was hand-hygiene compliance. Measures included ratings of implementation fidelity, observed hand-hygiene compliance, and factors affecting model implementation drawn from interviews. FINDINGS Analyses support the hypothesis that greater fidelity to the organizational model was associated with higher compliance with hand-hygiene guidelines. High-fidelity sites showed larger effect sizes for improvement in hand-hygiene compliance than lower-fidelity sites. Adherence to the organizational model was in turn affected by factors in three categories: urgency to improve, organizational environment, and improvement climate. IMPLICATIONS Implementation of EBPs, particularly those that cut across multiple processes of care, is a complex process with many possibilities for failure. The results provide the basis for a refined understanding of relationships among components of the organizational model and factors in the organizational context affecting them. This understanding suggests practical lessons for future implementation efforts and contributes to theoretical understanding of the dynamics of the implementation of EBPs.

VA’s Expansion of Supportive Housing: Successes and Challenges on the Path Toward Housing First

OBJECTIVES The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is transitioning to a Housing First approach to placement of veterans in permanent supportive housing through the use of rental vouchers, an ambitious organizational transformation. This qualitative study examined the experiences of eight VA facilities undertaking this endeavor in 2012. METHODS A multidisciplinary team interviewed facility leadership, midlevel managers, and frontline staff (N=95 individuals) at eight VA facilities representing four U.S. regions. The team used a semistructured interview protocol and the constant comparative method to explore how individuals throughout the organizations experienced and responded to the challenges of transitioning to a Housing First approach. RESULTS Frontline staff faced challenges in rapidly housing homeless veterans because of difficult rental markets, the need to coordinate with local public housing authorities, and a lack of available funds for move-in costs. Staff sought to balance their time spent on housing activities with intensive case management of highly vulnerable veterans. Finding low-demand sheltering options (that is, no expectations regarding sobriety or treatment participation, as in the Housing First model) for veterans waiting for housing presented a significant challenge to implementation of Housing First. Facility leadership supported Housing First implementation through resource allocation, performance monitoring, and reliance on midlevel managers to understand and meet the challenges of implementation. CONCLUSIONS The findings highlight the considerable practical challenges and innovative solutions arising from a large-scale effort to implement Housing First, with particular attention to the experiences of individuals at all levels within an organization.

How Hospitals Reengineer Their Discharge Processes to Reduce Readmissions.

Background:The Re-Engineered Discharge (RED) program is a hospital-based initiative shown to decrease hospital reutilization. We implemented the RED in 10 hospitals to study the implementation process. Design:We recruited 10 hospitals from different regions of the United States to implement the RED and provided training for participating hospital leaders and implementation staff using the RED Toolkit as the basis of the curriculum followed by monthly telephone-based technical assistance for up to 1 year. Methods:Two team members interviewed key informants from each hospital before RED implementation and then 1 year later. Interview data were analyzed according to common and comparative themes identified across institutions. Readmission outcomes were collected on participating hospitals and compared pre- versus post-RED implementation. Results:Key findings included (1) wide variability in the fidelity of the RED intervention; (2) engaged leadership and multidisciplinary implementation teams were keys to success; (3) common challenges included obtaining timely follow-up appointments, transmitting discharge summaries to outpatient clinicians, and leveraging information technology. Eight out of 10 hospitals reported improvement in 30-day readmission rates after RED implementation. Conclusions:A supportive hospital culture is essential for successful RED implementation. A flexible implementation strategy can be used to implement RED and reduce readmissions.

Survey-assessed quality and organizational factors related to quality in Pursuing Perfection hospitals.

Background: The goal of the Pursuing Perfection (P2) program was to encourage organizations to push quality improvement to new levels of excellence. As part of an evaluation of P2, we surveyed employees at the 7 participating P2 organizations to (1) assess their perceptions of patient care quality and improvement progress and (2) examine perceived performance on organizational and workgroup characteristics associated with quality. Methods: Many survey questions were drawn from existing conceptual models and survey instruments. We used factor analysis to create new scales from questions that were not part of established scales. We used correlation coefficients and multivariable models to examine relationships among variables. Results and Conclusions: Variables most strongly associated with perceived quality included standardized and simplified care processes resulting in coordinated care and smooth handoffs, a clear sense of organizational direction and clear action plans, and communication with staff about reasons for change and improvement progress made. Of those variables with a strong relationship to quality, ones with relatively low mean ratings included workgroup coordination; sufficient resources and support for improvement; training; and efficient use of people, time, and energy. These are important areas on which management should focus to improve employee ratings of quality.

Making housing first happen: organizational leadership in VA's expansion of permanent supportive housing.

ABSTRACTBACKGROUNDWhile most organizational literature has focused on initiatives that transpire inside the hospital walls, the redesign of American health care increasingly asks that health care institutions address matters outside their walls, targeting the health of populations. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)’s national effort to end Veteran homelessness represents an externally focused organizational endeavor.OBJECTIVEOur aim was to evaluate the role of organizational practices in the implementation of Housing First (HF), an evidence-based homeless intervention for chronically homeless individuals.DESIGNThis was an interview-based comparative case study conducted across eight VA Medical Centers (VAMCs).PARTICIPANTSFront line staff, mid-level managers, and senior leaders at VA Medical Centers were interviewed between February and December 2012.APPROACHUsing a structured narrative and numeric scoring, we assessed the correlation between successful HF implementation and organizational practices devised according to the organizational transformation model (OTM).KEY RESULTSScoring results suggested a strong association between HF implementation and OTM practice. Strong impetus to house Veterans came from national leadership, reinforced by Medical Center directors closely tracking results. More effective Medical Center leaders differentiated themselves by joining front-line staff in the work (at public events and in process improvement exercises), by elevating homeless-knowledgeable persons into senior leadership, and by exerting themselves to resolve logistic challenges. Vertical alignment and horizontal integration advanced at sites that fostered work groups cutting across service lines and hierarchical levels. By contrast, weak alignment from top to bottom typically also hindered cooperation across departments. Staff commitment to ending homelessness was high, though sustainability planning was limited in this baseline year of observation.CONCLUSIONKey organizational practices correlated with more successful implementation of HF for homeless Veterans. Medical Center directors substantively influenced the success of this endeavor through their actions to foster impetus, demonstrate commitment and support alignment and integration.

Housing first on a large scale: Fidelity strengths and challenges in the VA’s HUD-VASH program.

Housing First (HF) combines permanent supportive housing and supportive services for homeless individuals and removes traditional treatment-related preconditions for housing entry. There has been little research describing strengths and shortfalls of HF implementation outside of research demonstration projects. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has transitioned to an HF approach in a supportive housing program serving over 85,000 persons. This offers a naturalistic window to study fidelity when HF is adopted on a large scale. We operationalized HF into 20 criteria grouped into 5 domains. We assessed 8 VA medical centers twice (1 year apart), scoring each criterion using a scale ranging from 1 (low fidelity) to 4 (high fidelity). There were 2 HF domains (no preconditions and rapidly offering permanent housing) for which high fidelity was readily attained. There was uneven progress in prioritizing the most vulnerable clients for housing support. Two HF domains (sufficient supportive services and a modern recovery philosophy) had considerably lower fidelity. Interviews suggested that operational issues such as shortfalls in staffing and training likely hindered performance in these 2 domains. In this ambitious national HF program, the largest to date, we found substantial fidelity in focusing on permanent housing and removal of preconditions to housing entry. Areas of concern included the adequacy of supportive services and adequacy in deployment of a modern recovery philosophy. Under real-world conditions, large-scale implementation of HF is likely to require significant additional investment in client service supports to assure that results are concordant with those found in research studies.

Housing First and the Risk of Failure: A Comment on Westermeyer and Lee (2013).

Abstract Over the last 5 years, community policies in response to homelessness have shifted toward offering permanent housing accompanied by treatment supports, without requiring treatment success as a precondition. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has embraced this “Housing First” approach. A 2013 report sounds a contrarian note. In a 16-person quasi-experimental study, 8 veterans who entered VA’s permanent supportive housing did poorly, whereas 8 veterans who remained in more traditional treatment did well. In this commentary, we suggest that the report was problematic in the conceptualization of the matters it sought to address and in its science. Nonetheless, it highlights challenges that must not be ignored. From this report and other research, we now know that even more attention is required to support clinical recovery for Housing First clients. Successful implementation of Housing First requires guidance from agency leaders, and their support for clinical staff when individual clients fare poorly.

Collaborative Care for Returning Veterans

Background: Treatment of Returning Veterans (RVs) involves heterogeneous challenges including post traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injuries, and substance dependence. Individual RVs fall along a diagnostic and functional spectrum ranging from remarkably resilient to extremely impaired. Successful treatment requires systems capable of managing such complex, varied presentations and may require adaptations to meet the needs of this population. The Collaborative Chronic Care Model (CCM) may be useful in this regard. Methods: We interviewed 20 staff members at a large urban VA medical center who care for RVs to determine strengths and areas for improvement. We used qualitative methods to assess whether the CCM could be applied to organize care to serve RV needs and prevent chronicity. Results: Analysis of interview data and fit of emergent themes to CCM elements led to consensus that the CCM was likely to be an effective framework for organizing care of RVs provided certain adaptations are made. Need for adaptation was based on analysis of themes that did not match to CCM elements. Of these, “Unique Characteristics of RVs” and “Patient Engagement” were judged to be most essential to informing adaptations to the CCM. Conclusion: Results show the CCM as likely to be an effective method of organizing care for this non-chronic population if expanded emphasis is placed on understanding unique population characteristics as a means of fostering patient engagement. Follow-up studies using RVs and other non-chronic populations as primary sources and testing of hypotheses at multiple sites would further clarify meaning and generalizability of these findings.