Search results

At the beginning of the 21st century, multiple and diverse social entities, including the public (consumers), private and nonprofit healthcare institutions, government (public health) and other industry sectors, began to recognize the limitations of the current fragmented healthcare system paradigm. Primary stakeholders, including employers, insurance companies, and healthcare professional organizations, also voiced dissatisfaction with unacceptable health outcomes and rising costs. Grand challenges and wicked problems threatened the viability of the health sector. American health systems responded with innovations and advances in healthcare delivery frameworks that encouraged shifts from intra- and inter-sector arrangements to multi-sector, lasting relationships that emphasized patient centrality along with long-term commitments to sustainability and accountability. This pathway, leading to a population health approach, also generated the need for transformative business models. The coproduction of health framework, with its emphasis on cross-sector alignments, nontraditional partner relationships, sustainable missions, and accountability capable of yielding return on investments, has emerged as a unique strategy for facing disruptive threats and challenges from nonhealth sector corporations. This chapter presents a coproduction of health framework, goals and criteria, examples of boundary spanning network alliance models, and operational (integrator, convener, aggregator) strategies. A comparison of important organizational science theories, including institutional theory, network/network analysis theory, and resource dependency theory, provides suggestions for future research directions necessary to validate the utility of the coproduction of health framework as a precursor for paradigm change.

Barriers to adequate healthcare in rural areas remain a grand challenge for local healthcare systems. In addition to patients' travel burdens, lack of health insurance, and lower health literacy, rural healthcare systems also experience significant resource shortages, as well as issues with recruitment and retention of healthcare providers, particularly specialists. These factors combined result in complex change management-focused challenges for rural healthcare systems. Change management initiatives are often resource intensive, and in rural health organizations already strapped for resources, it may be particularly risky to embark on change initiatives. One way to address these change management concerns is by leveraging socio-technical simulation models to estimate techno-economic feasibility (e.g., is it technologically feasible, and is it economical?) as well as socio-utility feasibility (e.g., how will the changes be utilized?). We present a framework for how healthcare systems can integrate modeling and simulation techniques from systems engineering into a change management process. Modeling and simulation are particularly useful for investigating the amount of uncertainty about potential outcomes, guiding decision-making that considers different scenarios, and validating theories to determine if they accurately reflect real-life processes. The results of these simulations can be integrated into critical change management recommendations related to developing readiness for change and addressing resistance to change. As part of our integration, we present a case study showcasing how simulation modeling has been used to determine feasibility and potential resistance to change considerations for implementing a mobile radiation oncology unit. Recommendations and implications are discussed.

This chapter qualitatively explored the impact of including parent liaisons (i.e., parents with lived experience caring for a child with complex needs, who support other caregivers in navigating child and family needs) in a case conferencing model for children with complex medical/social needs. Case conferences are used to address fragmented care, shared decision-making, and set patient-centered goals. Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians and parent liaisons to assess the involvement of parent liaisons in case conferencing. Two main themes included benefits of parent liaison involvement (10 subthemes) and challenges to parent liaison involvement (5 subthemes). Clinicians reported that liaison participation and support of patients reduced stress for clinicians as well as family members. Challenges to liaison involvement included clinical team/parent liaison communication delays, which were further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Parent liaison involvement in case conferences is perceived to be beneficial to children with complex needs, their families, and the clinical team. Integration of liaisons ensures the familial perspective is included in clinical goal setting.

Family care partners are significantly involved in healthcare tasks in order to support adult relatives. Yet, unlike pediatric models of care where caregivers of children are formally integrated into healthcare teams, care partners of adults are rarely engaged in a formal, structured, or consistent manner. Their inclusion in the healthcare team is critical to their capacity to continue supporting their relative. A meaningful dialogue between policy and healthcare management is required to identify feasible and effective ways of engaging family care partners in healthcare teams.

Although educators would likely agree that values and ethics are important in all disciplines, they have particular importance for practice-oriented fields. These applied professionals need to solve complex social problems that require the application of ethical standards and value perspectives. While the importance of value-engaged practice is known to the applied field, there is little research and conversation about how values can be integrated into teaching. This chapter synthesizes values-education approaches in various practice-based disciplines such as public administration (PA), program evaluation, social work, and public health. This chapter draws from empirical and theoretical works as well as the authors' experiences developing, participating in, and conducting values-based research on professionals and professional education.

While uncertainty has always been a feature of the healthcare environment, its pace and scope are rapidly increasing, fueled by myriad factors such as technological advancements, the threat and frequency of disruptive events, global economic developments, and increasing complexity. Contemporary healthcare organizations thus persistently face what is known as “deep uncertainty,” which obscures their ability to predict outcomes of strategic action and decision-making, presenting them with novel challenges and threatening their survival. Persistent, deep uncertainty challenges us to revisit and reconsider how we think about uncertainty and the strategic actions needed by organizations to thrive under these circumstances. Simply put, how can healthcare organizations thrive in the face of deeply uncertain environments? We argue that healthcare organizations need to employ both adaptive and creative strategic approaches in order to effectively meet patients' needs and capture value in the long-term future. The chapter concludes by offering two ways organizations can build the dynamic capabilities needed to employ such approaches.