Suchergebnisse

Though increasingly useful for developing complex healthcare innovations, interdisciplinary teams are prone to resistance and other organizational challenges. However, how teams are affected by and manage external constraints over the lifecycle of their innovation project is not well understood. We used a multimethod qualitative approach consisting of over 3 years of participant observation data to analyze how four interdisciplinary teams across different health systems experienced and managed constraints as they pursued process innovations. Specifically, we derived the constraint management process, which demonstrates how teams address constraints at different stages of innovation by applying various tactics. Our findings point to several practical implications concerning innovation processes in healthcare: (a) how conditions in the organizational context, or constraints, can impede team progress at different stages of innovation; and (2) the collective efforts, or tactics, teams use to manage or work around these constraints to further progress on their innovations.

Accountable Care Organizations' (ACOs) pursuit of the triple aim of higher quality, lower cost, and improved population health has met with mixed results. To improve the design and implementation of ACOs we look to organizations that manage similarly complex, dynamic, and tightly coupled conditions while sustaining exceptional performance known as high-reliability organizations. We describe the key processes through which organizations achieve reliability, the leadership and organizational practices that enable it, and the role that professionals can play when charged with enacting it. Specifically, we present concrete practices and processes from health care organizations pursuing high-reliability and from early ACOs to illustrate how the triple aim may be met by cultivating mindful organizing, practicing reliability-enhancing leadership, and identifying and supporting reliability professionals. We conclude by proposing a set of research questions to advance the study of ACOs and high-reliability research.

To foster bottom-up innovations, health care organizations are leveraging interdisciplinary frontline innovation teams. These teams include workers across hierarchical levels and professional backgrounds, pooling diverse knowledge sources to develop innovations that improve patient and worker experiences and care quality, equity, and costs. Yet, these frontline innovation teams experience barriers, such as time constraints, being new to innovation, and team-based role hierarchies. We investigated the practices that such teams in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) used to overcome these barriers. Our 20-month study of two FQHC innovation teams provides one of the first accounts of how practices that sustained worker engagement in innovation and supported their ideas to implementation evolve over time. We also show the varied quantity of engagement practices used at different stages of the innovation process. At a time when FQHCs face pressure to innovate amid staff shortages, our study provides recommendations to support their work.

Efforts to transform health care delivery to improve care have increasingly focused on care integration. However, variation in how integration is defined has complicated efforts to design, synthesize, and compare studies of integration in health care. Evaluations of integration initiatives would be enhanced by describing them according to clear definitions of integration and specifying which empirical relationships they seek to test—whether among types of integration or between integration and outcomes of care. Drawing on previous work, we present a comprehensive theoretical model of relationships between types of integration and propose how to measure them.

Despite urgent need for innovation, adaptation, and change in health care, few tools enable researchers or practitioners to assess the extent to which health care facilities perform as learning organizations or the effects of initiatives that require learning. This study's objective was to develop and test a short-form Learning Organization Survey to fill this gap. The authors applied exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis to data from Veterans Health Administration personnel to derive a short-form survey and then conducted further confirmatory factor analysis and factor invariance testing on additional Veterans Health Administration data to evaluate the short form. Results suggest that a 27-item, 7-factor survey (2 environmental factors, 1 on leadership, and 4 on concrete learning processes and practices) reliably measures key features of organizational learning, allowing researchers to evaluate theoretical propositions about organizational learning, its antecedents, and outcomes and enabling managers to assess and enhance organizations' learning capabilities and performance.

We explore how members of a community of practice learn new tools and techniques when environmental shifts undermine existing expertise. In our 20-month comparative field study of medical assistants and patient-service representatives learning to use new digital technology in five primary care sites, we find that the traditional master-apprentice training model worked well when established practices were being conferred to trainees. When environmental change required introducing new tools and techniques with which the experienced members had no expertise, third-party managers selected newer members as trainers because managers judged them to be agile learners who were less committed to traditional hierarchies and more willing to deviate from traditional norms. This challenged community members' existing status, which was based on the historical distinctions of long tenure and expertise in traditional tasks. In three sites, the introduction of this illegitimate learning hierarchy sparked status competition among trainees and trainers, and trainees collectively resisted learning new tools and techniques. In the other two sites, managers paired the new, illegitimate learning hierarchy with the opportunity for trainee status mobility by rotating the trainer role; here, trainees embraced learning in order to exit the lower-status trainee group and join the higher-status trainer group. Drawing on ideas of status group legitimacy and mobility, we suggest that managers' pairing of an illegitimate learning hierarchy with the opportunity for trainee status mobility is a mechanism for enabling the situated learning of new techniques when traditional expertise erodes.

Valid measures of the integration of patient care could provide rapid and accurate feedback on the successfulness of current efforts to improve health care delivery systems. This article describes the development and pilot testing of a new survey, based on a novel conceptual model, which measures the integration of patient care as experienced by patients. We administered the survey to 1,289 patients with multiple chronic conditions from one health system and received responses from 527 patients (43%). Psychometric analysis of responses supported a six-dimension model of integration with satisfactory internal consistency, discriminant validity, and goodness of fit. The Patient Perceptions of Integrated Care survey can be used to measure the integration of care received by chronically ill patients for two main purposes: as a research tool to compare interventions intended to improve the integration of care and as a quality improvement tool intended to guide the refinement of delivery system innovations.

Integration of care is emerging as a central challenge of health care delivery, particularly for patients with multiple, complex chronic conditions. The authors argue that the concept of "integrated patient care" would benefit from further clarification regarding (a) the object of integration and (b) its essential components, particularly when constructing measures.To address these issues, the authors propose a definition of integrated patient care that distinguishes it from integrated delivery organizations, acknowledging that integrated organizational structures and processes may fail to produce integrated patient care. The definition emphasizes patients' central role as active participants in managing their own health by including patient centeredness as a key element of integrated patient care. Measures based on the proposed definition will enable empirical assessment of the potential relationships between the integration of organizations, the integration of patient care, and patient outcomes, providing valuable guidance to health systems reformers.

Mobilizing anchor institutions to promote community health and wellbeing is gaining prominence as an approach to systems change. Anchors are often conceptualized as large, locally rooted, nonprofits that leverage their resources for local benefit. However, existing literature underemphasizes 2 opportunities to enhance the systemic impact of anchoring activity: (1) coordinated action by anchoring networks that include diverse, multi-level stakeholders—a hallmark of health promotion and (2) the potential contributions of the business sector to anchoring networks. Our perspective describes the significance of both for amplifying anchoring impact and identifies critical questions for enabling action.

We compared results of safety climate survey questions from health care respondents with those from naval aviation, a high-reliability organization. Separate surveys containing a subset of 23 similar questions were conducted among employees from 15 hospitals and from naval aviators from 226 squadrons. For each question a "problematic response" was defined that suggested an absence of a safety climate. Overall, the problematic response rate was 5.6% for naval aviators versus 17.5% for hospital personnel (p < .0001). The problematic response was 20.9% in highhazard hospital domains such as emergency departments and operating rooms. Problematic response among hospital workers was up to 12 times greater than that among aviators on certain questions. Although further research on safety climate in health care is warranted, hospitals may need to make substantial changes to achieve a safety climate consistent with the status of high-reliability organizations.

More is known about the structural features of health system integration than the social features—elements of normative integration (alignment of norms) and interpersonal integration (collaboration among professionals and with patients). We surveyed practice managers and 1,360 staff and physicians at 59 practice sites within 17 health systems (828 responses; 61%). Building on prior theory, we developed and established the psychometric properties of survey measures describing normative and interpersonal integration. Normative and interpersonal integration were both consistently related to better provider experience, perceived care quality, and clinical integration (e.g., a 1-point increase in a practice's normative integration was associated with 0.53-point higher job satisfaction and 0.77-point higher perceived care quality in the practice, measured on 1 to 5 scales, p < .01). Variation in social features of integration may help explain why some health systems better integrate care, pointing to normative and interpersonal integration as potential resources for improvement.

To evaluate the potential for a patient-centered medical home initiative to reduce utilization and cost while improving quality, we examined a natural experiment involving 11 primary care practices in Cincinnati, Ohio, that participated in the Aligning Forces for Quality Multi-Payer Patient Centered Medical Home pilot. Our research design involved difference-in-difference analyses, comparing changes in utilization, costs, and quality between patients attributed to pilot practices compared with those attributed to a matched comparison cohort after 2 years of active engagement by the practices. The Cincinnati pilot was associated with a reduction of ambulatory care–sensitive emergency department visits of approximately 0.7 per 1,000 member months or approximately 22.6% ( p = .01). While there was a reduction in total costs of care of $7,679 per 1,000 member months, the difference did not reach statistical significance. After 2 years of the pilot, lipid testing in diabetics had increased by 2.7 percentage points (a 3.3% improvement; p < .0001). Patient-centered medical homes have the potential to improve the quality of care and reduce emergency department use but expectations for cost control in a relatively short time horizon and absent other changes may be unrealistic.

Requirements for integrating care across providers, settings, and over time increase with patients' needs. Health care providers' ability to offer care that patients experience as integrated may vary among patients with different levels of need. We explore the variation in patients' perceptions of integrated care among Medicare beneficiaries based on the beneficiary's level of need using ordinary least square regression for each of four high-need groups: beneficiaries (a) with complex chronic conditions, (b) with frailties, (c) below 65 with disability, and (d) with any (of the first three) high needs. We control for beneficiary demographics and other factors affecting integrated care, and we conduct sensitivity analyses controlling for multiple individual chronic conditions. We find significant positive associations with level of need for provider support for self-directed care and medication and home health management. Controlling for multiple individual chronic conditions reduces effect sizes and number of significant relationships.