Search results

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted healthcare systems, presenting unforeseen challenges that necessitated the implementation of change management strategies to adapt to the new contextual conditions. This study aims to analyze organizational changes within the total hip replacement (THR) surgery pathway at multiple levels, including macro, meso and micro. It employs data triangulation from various sources to gauge the complexity of the change process and comprehend how multi-level decision-making influenced an unexpected shift.

A multicentric, single in-depth case study was conducted using a mixed-methods approach. Data sources included patient-reported outcome measures specific to the THR pathway and carefully structured in-depth interviews administered to managers and clinicians in two healthcare organizations serving the same population.

Decisions made at the macro level resulted in an overall reduction in surgical activities. Organizational changes at the meso level led to a complete cessation or partial reorganization of activities. Micro-level actions for change and adaptation revealed diverse and fragmented change management strategies.

Organizations with segmented structures may require a robust and structured department for coordinating change management responses to prevent the entire system from becoming stuck in the absorptive phase of change. However, it is important to recognize that absorptive solutions can serve as a starting point for genuine innovations in change management.

The utilization of data triangulation enables the authors to visualize how specific changes implemented in response to the pandemic have influenced the observed outcomes. From a managerial perspective, it provides insights into how future innovations could be introduced.

This paper seeks to understand relationships between prison healthcare and integrated care systems (ICS), including how these affect the delivery of new healthcare interventions. It also aims to understand how closer integration between prison and ICS could improve cross system working between community and prison healthcare teams, and highlights challenges that exist to integration between prison healthcare and ICS.

The study uses evidence from research on the implementation of a pilot study to establish telemedicine secondary care appointments between prisons and an acute trust in one English region (a cross-system intervention). Qualitative interview data were collected from prison (n = 12) and community (n = 8) healthcare staff related to the experience of implementing a cross-system telemedicine initiative. Thematic analysis was undertaken on interview data, guided by an implementation theory and framework.

The research found four main themes related to the closer integration between prison healthcare and ICS: (1) Recognition of prison health as a priority; (2) Finding a way to reconcile networks and finances between community and prison commissioning; (3) Awareness of prison service influence on NHS healthcare planning and delivery; and (4) Shared investment in prison health can lead to benefits.

This is the first article to provide research evidence to support or challenge the integration of specialist health and justice (H&J) commissioning into local population health.

In Canada, integrated care pilot projects are often implemented as a local reform strategy to improve the quality of patient care and system efficiencies. In the qualitative study reported here, the authors explored the experiences of healthcare professionals when first implementing integrated care pilot projects, bringing together physical and mental health services, in a community hospital setting.

Engaging a qualitative descriptive study design, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 healthcare professionals who discussed their experiences with implementing three integrated care pilot projects one year following project launch. The thematic analysis captured early implementation issues and was informed by an institutional logics framework.

Three themes highlight disruptions to established logics reported by healthcare professionals during the early implementation phase: (1) integrated care practices increased workload and impacted clinical workflows; (2) integrating mental and physical health services altered patient and healthcare provider relationships; and (3) the introduction of integrated care practices disrupted healthcare team relations.

Study findings highlight the importance of considering existing logics in healthcare settings when planning integrated care initiatives. While integrated care pilot projects can contribute to organizational, team and individual practice changes, the priorities of healthcare stakeholders, relational work required and limited project resources can create significant implementation barriers.

The United States devotes a larger share of its GDP to health care and spends more on health care per capita than any other country. The sheer size of the total spending on health care, at approximately $3.5 trillion in 2017, puts significant pressure on all payers and crowds out other forms of public and private spending.

In this brief commentary the authors suggest that, as part of the effort to deal with this pressure, the United States should look at borrowing a cost containment strategy from other countries: the use of hard caps on spending growth. The authors draw on our their experience of working with decision-makers over the last 20 years on the topic of priority setting to put forward some ideas on whether there is potential for application of trade-offs in the United States.

As hard caps force choices to be made, a necessary condition for successful implementation of this policy is the presence of an effective priority-setting framework to ensure that the right choices are made in operationalizing spending limitations. Work on this topic elsewhere can provide some insight into the use of a criteria-based framework for priority setting that purports transparency in decision-making to achieve value-based decisions.

Other countries still have much work to do, but there is a substantial track record of using formal priority-setting approaches that could potentially inform practice in the United States. We suggest that there are key segments of the US healthcare system where the adoption of formal priority-setting frameworks to guide trade-off decisions is feasible. Piloting such activity in these contexts is the next natural step in this line of inquiry.

Using a complexity-informed approach, we aim to understand why introduction of a mobile service delivery model for osteoporosis across diverse organisational and country contexts in the UK National Health Service (NHS) met with variable success.

Six comparative case studies; three prospectively in Scotland using an action research-informed approach; and three retrospectively in England with variable degrees of success. The Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability framework explored interactions between multi-level contextual factors and their influence on efforts to introduce and sustain services.

Cross-boundary service development was a continuous process of adaptation and evolution in rapidly shifting healthcare context. Whilst the outer healthcare policy context differed significantly across cases, inner contextual features predominated in shaping the success or otherwise of service innovations. Technical and logistical issues, organisational resources, patient and staff actions combined in unpredictable ways to shape the lifecycle of service change. Patient and staff thoughts about place and access to services actively shaped service development. The use of tacit “soft intelligence” and a sense of “chronic unease” emerged as important in successfully navigating around awkward people and places.

“Chronic unease” and “soft intelligence” can be used to help individuals and organisations “tame” complexity, identify hidden threats and opportunities to achieving change in a particular context, and anticipate how these may change over time. Understanding how patients think and feel about where, when and how care is delivered provides unique insights into previously unseen aspects of context, and can usefully inform development and sustainability of patient-centred healthcare services.

This study has uniquely traced the fortunes of a single service innovation across diverse organisational and country contexts. Novel application of the NASSS framework enabled comparative analysis across real-time service change and historical failures. This study also adds to theories of context and complexity by surfacing the neglected role of patients in shaping healthcare context.

The procurement and supply of crucial healthcare products in the early stages of the COVID-19 emergency were chaotic. To prepare for future crises, we must be able to describe what went wrong, and why, and map out ways to build agility and resilience. How can this be done effectively, given the highly complex and diverse network of actors across governments, care providers and supply chains, and the extreme uncertainty and dynamism in the procurement system and supplier markets? The purpose of this study was to capture learning from practitioners in “real time” in a way that could frame and inform capacity building across healthcare systems with varying procurement and supply management maturity.

This exploratory study involved interviews with 58 senior public procurement practitioners in central and regional governments, NGOs and leaders of professional organizations from 23 countries, very early in the COVID crisis. Following the first, inductive phase of analysis leading to five descriptive dimensions, the awareness-motivation-capability (A-M-C) framework was applied in a further round of coding, to understand immediate challenges faced by procurement practitioners, how the complex, multi-level procurement system that shaped their motivations to respond and critical capabilities required to face these challenges.

Developments across 23 countries and practitioners' learning about procurement and supply in the pandemic crisis can be captured in five overarching themes: governance and organization, knowledge and skills, information systems, regulation and supply base issues. Together these themes cover the strengths and gaps in procurement and supply capability encountered by procurement leaders and front-line personnel. They highlight the various facets of structure, resource and process which constitute organizational capability. However, to account better for the highly dynamic situation characterized by both unprecedented rivalry and cooperation, analysts must also pay attention to actors' emerging awareness of the situation and their rapidly changing motivations.

The application of the A-M-C framework is unique in the healthcare supply chain and disaster management literature. It enables a comprehensive overview of healthcare procurement from a system perspective. This study shows how increasing system preparedness for future emergencies depends both on developing critical capabilities and understanding how awareness and motivation influence the effective deployment of those capabilities.

Several healthcare quality assessment tools measure the processes and outcomes of the care system. The actual physical infrastructure (buildings and organizational) aspects are, however, rarely considered. The purpose of this paper is to describe the process of validation and weighting of an evidence-informed framework for the quality assessment of hospital facilities from social, environmental and organizational perspectives to complement other assessments.

Sustainable High-quality Healthcare version 2 (SustHealth v2) is the updated version of an existing framework composed of three domains (social, environmental and organizational quality). To validate and establish a relevant weighting, interviews were conducted with 15 professionals within the field of healthcare planning, design, research and management. The study has been conducted through semi-structured interviews and the application of the Simon Roy Figueras (SRF) procedure for the elicitation of weights criteria. The data collected have been processed through the DecSpace web platform.

Among the three domains, the organizational qualities appear to be the most important (W = 49%), followed by the environmental (W = 29%) and social aspects (W = 22%). Relevant indicators such as future-proofing, wayfinding and users’ space control emerged as the most important within each macro-area. Those results are confirmed by the outcome of the interviews that highlight user/patient-centeredness, wayfinding strategies and space functionality as the most important concepts to foster in existing healthcare facilities improvement.

The study highlights important structural and organizational aspects that hospital managers and planners can consider when dealing with healthcare facilities’ quality improvement.

The use of the SRF multicriteria method is novel in this context when used to weight an assessment tool with a focus on hospital built environment.

The goal of this research is to analyse the obstacles to the implementation of mobile health (mHealth) in India and to gain an understanding of the contextual inter-relationships that exist amongst those obstacles.

Potential barriers and their interrelationships in their respective contexts have been uncovered. Using MICMAC analysis, the categorization of these barriers was done based on their degree of reliance and driving power (DP). Furthermore, an interpretive structural modeling (ISM) framework for the barriers to mHealth activities in India has been proposed.

The study explores a total of 15 factors that reduce the efficiency of mHealth adoption in India. The findings of the Matrix Cross-Reference Multiplication Applied to a Classification (MICMAC) investigation show that the economic situation of the government, concerns regarding the safety of intellectual technologies and privacy issues are the primary obstacles because of the significant driving power they have in mHealth applications.

Promoters of mHealth practices may be able to make better plans if they understand the social barriers and how they affect each other; this leads to easier adoption of these practices. The findings of this study might be helpful for governments of developing nations to produce standards relating to the deployment of mHealth; this will increase the efficiency with which it is adopted.

At this time, there is no comprehensive analysis of the factors that influence the adoption of mobile health care with social cognitive theory in developing nations like India. In addition, there is a lack of research in investigating how each of these elements affects the success of mHealth activities and how the others interact with them. Because developed nations learnt the value of mHealth practices during the recent pandemic, this study, by investigating the obstacles to the adoption of mHealth and their inter-relationships, makes an important addition to both theory and practice.

Despite many calls to strengthen connections between health systems and communities as a way to improve primary healthcare, little is known about how new collaborations can effectively alter service provision. The purpose of this paper is to explore how a health authority, municipal leaders and physicians worked together in the process of transforming primary healthcare.

A longitudinal qualitative case study was conducted to explore the processes of change at the regional level and within seven communities across Northern British Columbia (BC), Canada. Over three years, 239 interviews were conducted with physicians, municipal leaders, health authority clinicians and leaders and other health and social service providers. Interviews and contextual documents were analyzed and interpreted to articulate how ongoing transformation has occurred.

Four overall strategies with nine approaches were apparent. The strategies were partnering for innovation, keeping the focus on people in communities, taking advantage of opportunities for change and encouraging experimentation while managing risk. The strategies have bumped the existing system out of the status quo and are achieving transformation. Key components have been a commitment to a clear end-in-view, a focus on patients, families, and communities, and acting together over time.

This study illuminates how partnering for primary healthcare transformation is messy and complicated but can create a foundation for whole system change.

This paper aims to demonstrate the approach taken in delivering the quality and impact elements of Knowledge for Healthcare, the strategic development framework for National Health Service (NHS) library and knowledge services in England. It examines the work undertaken to enhance quality and demonstrate the value and impact of health library and knowledge services. It describes the interventions developed and implemented over a five-year period 2015–2020 and the move towards an outcome rather than process approach to impact and quality.

The case study illustrates a range of interventions that have been developed, including the outcomes of implementation to date. The methodology behind each intervention is informed by the evidence base and includes professional engagement.

The outcomes approach to the development and implementation of quality and impact interventions and assets provides evidence to demonstrate the value of library and knowledge staff to the NHS in England to both high-level decision-makers and service users.

The interventions are original concepts developed within the NHS to demonstrate system-wide impacts and change. The Evaluation Framework has been developed based on the impact planning and assessment (IPA) methodology. The interventions can be applied to other healthcare systems, and the generic learning is transferable to other library and knowledge sectors, such as higher education.