Search results

Primary care cancer lead clinicians (PCCLs) act strategically in primary care trusts (PCTs) in England to improve communication and understanding of cancer across primary and secondary care and provide a link between Cancer Networks and primary care. The aim is to evaluate the first three years of the initiative.

A postal questionnaire was sent to all PCT chief executives in all PCTs in England and some were passed on to other PCT managers for completion. The response rate was 61 per cent. PCT directors of public health were the largest group of respondents (29 per cent). Most (74 per cent) PCCLs were GPs and 22 per cent were nurses.

PCCLs were most likely to focus on palliative care and preventive services. Key achievements were identified as raising awareness of cancer, developing relationships and promoting primary care. The personal skills of the PCCLs were important as was support of colleagues at all levels. Lack of time was a major barrier to achievement, as was a lack of understanding of the role from others. Links with the Cancer Networks were being developed. About 85 per cent of managers wanted the role to continue.

The paper illustrates that PCCLs are at the forefront of improving cancer services in primary care. They are particularly important in view of the priority of reducing premature deaths and promotion of healthy lifestyles.

The purpose of this paper is to explore leadership in the context of the policy shift to collaborative working and integration currently being pursued in the UK NHS. As ways of integrating care are being explored in other countries it can be argued that this topic may have wider policy significance. This paper is particularly concerned with leadership in Primary Care Networks in the English NHS.

This paper is a conceptual paper using literature relating to the antecedents of shared leadership and relevant policy documents pertaining to the English NHS. The paper is informed, theoretically by the conceptual lens of shared leadership. A conceptual framework is developed identifying the antecedents of shared leadership that help to explain how shared leadership may be developed.

The paper identifies the challenges that may be faced by policymakers and those involved in Primary Care Networks in developing shared leadership. It also reveals the implications for policymakers in developing shared leadership.

The paper is conceptual. It is acknowledged that this is a preliminary study and further work will be required to test the conceptual framework empirically.

The paper discusses the policy implications of developing leadership in primary care networks. This has relevance to both the NHS and other countries.

There is limited research on the antecedents of shared leadership. In addition, the conceptual framework is applied to a new policy initiative.

We trace the evolution of a new integrated care policy in the English NHS (enhanced health in care homes, EHCH) from pilot model to wider roll out, over a 4-year period, into the circumstances of COVID-19.

Using published evidence and official documentation we compared and contrasted the original EHCH model/framework, subsequent draft specifications and the final proposals, ahead of implementation.

The Primary Care Network EHCH service specification has clearly arisen from the Vanguard programme; however, problems related to GP contracts and COVID-19 means, at least initially, there is likely to be some variability over who will be responsible for delivery. It is unknown whether this service, delivered at pace in the current circumstances, will achieve or affect the outcomes envisaged by the pilots.

This is our interpretation of the developing policy for enhanced health in care homes, which requires further follow-up research. We are beginning our final fieldwork phase in Summer 2020, to report on the Vanguard legacy.

Evaluations of policy success/failure should consider the context and the differing power relations that are present and may impact subsequent take-up and roll-out across the system. We recommend a longitudinal approach to enable a holistic view of policy implementation.

This paper reveals the fragility of health and care policymaking in the current climate. From initial concept, through development and testing, into forced early roll out, our observations reflect the unique impact of a global pandemic shock.

This paper aims to present the impact evaluation findings from a multiprofessional leadership programme commissioned in the South East of England to support primary care networks (PCNs) to lead system improvement together. It identifies programme impact at micro and meso system levels; a leadership impact continuum that can be used by individuals and teams to evidence impact of improvements in PCN practices; the learning and development strategies that were effective and proposes implications for other networks.

Mixed methods underpinned by practice development methodology were used to explore the impact of the programme on two practitioner cohorts across 16 PCNs. Data were collected at the start, mid-point and end of the eight-month programme.

Results illustrate an innovative approach to collective leadership development. A continuum of impact created with participants offers insight into the journey of transformation, recognising that “change starts with me”. The impact framework identifies enablers, attributes and consequences for measuring and leading change at micro, meso and macro levels of the health-care system. Participants learned how to facilitate change and collaboratively solve problems through peer consulting which created a safe space for individuals to discuss workplace issues and receive multiprofessional views through action learning. These activities enabled teams to present innovative projects to commissioners for service redesign, enabling their PCN to be more effective in meeting population health needs. The authors believe that this programme may provide a model for other PCNs England and other place-based care systems internationally.

This study offers insight into how to enable a journey of transformation for individuals and PCN teams to enhance team effectiveness and collective leadership for system-wide transformation required by the National Health Service Long Term Plan (2019).

This chapter examines the case studies in this volume with a focus on concepts and methods used in the study of multi-organization networks and partnerships, motivations to join in multi-party collaboration, how multi-organization collaborations organized and managed, what kinds of value are created by collaborations, and the role of leadership therein.

A comparative look at four vertical networks (in health care and education); two “issue” networks/partnerships (sustainable seafood and water use); and the roles of government in collaboration in horizontal, vertical, and issue-based arrangements.

The chapter describes “lessons” learned about building both sustainability and collaborative capabilities in and across partnering organizations and about improving partnership structures, processes, and results.

The chapter sums and synthesizes the volume’s contributions.

Alcohol Concern decided to develop the service for several reasons. Primary care is the main contact people have with the health service ‐ in any year 70% of the population will visit their general practitioner (GP). This makes primary care an ideal setting in which to detect and identify hazardous and dependent drinkers. While people experiencing difficulties or ill health because of their drinking will not necessarily attend a specialist alcohol service, they will probably visit their GP. Problem drinkers are known to consult their GPs twice as often as the average patient, the most common complaints are gastrointestinal, psychiatric and accidents (Heather & Kaner, in press).

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on research evidence and practice experience of transforming primary care to a more integrated and holistic model.

It is based on a scoping review which has been guided by primary care stakeholders and synthesises research evidence and practice experience from ten international case studies.

Adopting an inter-professional, community-orientated and population-based primary care model requires a fundamental transformation of thinking about professional roles, relationships and responsibilities. Team-based approaches can replicate existing power dynamics unless medical clinicians are willing to embrace less authoritarian leadership styles. Engagement of patients and communities is often limited due to a lack of capacity and belief that will make an impact. Internal (relationships, cultures, experience of improvement) and external (incentives, policy intentions, community pressure) contexts can encourage or derail transformation efforts.

Transformation requires a co-ordinated programme that incorporates the following elements – external facilitation of change; developing clinical and non-clinical leaders; learning through training and reflection; engaging community and professional stakeholders; transitional funding; and formative and summative evaluation.

This paper combines research evidence and international practice experience to guide future programmes to transform primary care.

Design, implementation, and evaluation are all important for integrated care. However, they miss one critical factor: education. The authors define “integrated care education” as meaningful learning that purposefully supports collaboration and the development of adaptive expertise in integrated care. The ECHO (Extensions for Community Health Outcomes) model is a novel digital health solution that uses technology-enabled learning (TEL) to facilitate, support, and model integrated care education. Using ECHO Concussion as a case study, the authors describe the effects of technology-enabled integrated care education on the micro-, meso-, and macro-dimensions of integrated care.

This case study was constructed using data extracted from ECHO Concussion from video-archived sessions, participant observation, and internal program evaluation memos. The research team met regularly to discuss the development of relevant themes to the dimensions of integrated care.

On the micro-level, clinical integration occurs through case-based learning and the development of adaptive expertise. On the meso-level, professional integration is achieved through the development of the “specialist generalist,” professional networks and empathy. Finally, on the macro-level, ECHO Concussion and the ECHO model achieve vertical and horizontal system integration in the delivery of integrated care. Vertical integration is achieved through ECHO by educating and connecting providers across sectors from primary to quaternary levels of care. Horizontal integration is achieved through the establishment of lateral peer-based networks across sectors as a result of participation in ECHO sessions with a focus on population-level health.

This case study examines the role of education in the delivery of integrated care through one program, ECHO Concussion. Using the three dimensions of integrated care on the micro-, meso-, and macro-levels, this case study is the first explicit operationalization of ECHO as a means of delivering integrated care education and supporting integrated care delivery.

The long-term financial stability of hospital systems represents a “grand challenge” in health care. New ownership forms, such as private equity (PE), promise to achieve better financial performance than nonprofit or for-profit systems. In this study, we compare two systems with many similarities, but radically different ownership structures, missions, governance, and merger and acquisition (M&A) strategies. Both were nonprofit, religious systems serving low-income communities – Montefiore Health System and Caritas Christi Health Care.

Montefiore's M&A strategy was to invest in local hospitals and create an integrated regional system, increasing revenues by adding primary doctors and community hospitals as feeders into the system and achieving efficiencies through effective resource allocation across specialized units. Slow and steady timing of acquisitions allowed for organizational learning and balancing of debt and equity. By 2019, it owned 11 hospitals with 40,000 employees and had strong positive financials and low reliance on debt.

By contrast, in 2010, PE firm Cerberus Capital bought out Caritas (renamed Steward Health Care System) and took control of the Board of Directors, who set the system's strategic direction. Cerberus used Steward as a platform for a massive debt-driven acquisition strategy. In 2016, it sold off most of its hospitals’ property for $1.25 billion, leaving hospitals saddled with long-term inflated leases; paid itself almost $500 million in dividends; and used the rest for leveraged buyouts of 27 hospitals in 9 states in 3 years. The rapid, scattershot M&A strategy was designed to create a large corporation that could be sold off in five years for financial gain – not for health care integration. Its debt load exploded, and by 2019, its financials were deeply in the red. Its Massachusetts hospitals were the worst financial performers of any system in the state. Cerberus exited Steward in 2020 in a deal that left its physicians, the new owners, holding the debt.

We build on the concept of “constellations of logics” (Goodrick & Reay, 2011) to further our understanding of the relationship between institutional logics and action. We do so through a comparative case study of similar primary health care initiatives in Denmark and Canada. We draw on micro- and macro-level data to show how both the arrangement and relationship among logics impacted the design and accomplishment of the initiatives in each country. Based on our data, we theorize five different mechanisms through which logics can simultaneously constrain and enable action.