Search results

Structural integration is increasingly explored as a means of achieving efficiency gains alongside improved health outcomes. In 2015, three boroughs in London, England began working together to develop an Accountable Care Organisation for the 750,000 population they serve. The purpose of this paper is to understand the experiences of working across organisational and sectoral boundaries for the benefit of the population, including enablers and barriers encountered, the role of financial incentives and perspectives on Accountable Care Organisations.

A single site instrumental case study involving 35 semi-structured interviews using a topic guide, with key leaders and decision makers from the site and nationally, between April 2016 and August 2016.

There are differences in levels of autonomy and operational priorities between councils and the NHS. Existing financial mechanisms can be used to overcome sectoral boundaries, but require strong leadership to implement. There are challenges associated with primary care participating in integration, including reluctance for small organisations to adopt the risk associated with large scale programmes. Interviewees were aligned on espoused ambitions for the Accountable Care Organisation but not on whether one organisation was needed to deliver these in practice.

Progressing the integration agenda requires consideration of the context of primary care and the core differences between health and government. Further, research into ACOs is required as they may not be required to deliver the anticipated integration and system outcomes. Understanding if there are specific population groups for whom cross-organisation and cross-sector working could have particular benefits would help to target efforts.

This paper highlights some of the challenges associated with cross-sector collaboration.

New organization theory posits that coordination mechanisms work by generating three integrating conditions: accountability (clarity about task responsibilities), predictability (clarity about which, when, and how tasks will be accomplished), and common understanding (shared perspectives about tasks). We apply this new theory to health care to improve understanding of how accountable care organizations (ACOs) are attempting to reduce the fragmentation that characterizes the US health care system. Drawing on four organizational case studies, we find that ACOs rely on a wide variety of coordination mechanisms that have been designed to leverage existing organizational capabilities, accommodate local contingencies. and, in some instances, interact strategically. We conclude that producing integrating conditions across the care continuum requires suites of interacting coordination mechanisms. Our findings provide a conceptual foundation for future research and improvements.

While it has long been established that social factors, such as housing, transportation, and income, influence health and health care outcomes, over the last decade, attention to this topic has grown dramatically. Reforms that promote high-quality care as well as responsibility for total cost of care have shifted focus among health care providers toward upstream determinants of health care outcomes. As a result, there has been a proliferation of activity focused on integrating and aligning social and medical care, many of which depend critically on cross-sector alliances. Despite considerable activity in this area, cross-sector alliances in health care remain largely undertheorized. Both literatures stand to gain from more attention to carefully knitting together the theoretical and management literature on alliances with the empirical, health policy and health services literature on cross-sector alliances in health care. In this chapter, we lay out what exists in the current scientific literature as well as a framework for considering much needed work in this area. We organize the literature and our commentary around the lifecycle of alliances: alliance formation, including factors prompting alliance formation, partner selection, and alliance goals; alliance maturity, including the work of these cross-sector alliances, governance, finance and contracts, staffing structure, and rewards; and critical crossroads, including alliance timelines, definitions of success, and dissolution. We also lay out critical areas for future inquiry, including better theorizing on cross-sector alliances, developing typologies of these cross-sector health care alliances, and the role of policy in cross-sector alliances.

There are longstanding concerns about the sustainability of the US health care system. Payment reform has been seen over the last decade as a key strategy to reorienting the US health care system around value. Alternative payment models (APMs) that seek to accomplish this goal have become increasingly prevalent in the US, yet there is a perception that physicians are resistant to their use and that organizations have been slow to adopt such models. The reasons for the limited effectiveness of APM programs are multifactorial and include aspects related to the design and implementation of these programs and lack of alignment and coordination across different payers and health care sectors. Most importantly, however, is that the current organizational structures in US health care serve to dampen the direct impact of these incentives, often because health care delivery organizations face conflicting incentives themselves. Organizations filter and refine the incentives from multiple external payment contracts and develop internal incentive systems that best reflect the amalgamation of the incentives embedded across their contracts, and thus the fragmented nature of the US health care system serves to undermine efforts to transform care under value-based contracts. In addition to organizations having conflicting incentives, there also are fundamental problems with the design and implementation of APMs that hinder their acceptance among physicians and the organizations in which they work. Moreover, much remains to be learned about how organizations can best adapt to succeed under these models, and how organizational culture can be leveraged to transform care.

This chapter integrates organization design and sustainability concepts to describe an accelerated transformational change at the Fairview Medical Group (United States).

A case study of the transformation at Fairview Medical Group’s primary care clinics was developed from interviews and first-person accounts of the change. Objective data regarding outcomes was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the redesign process.

The Fairview Medical Group developed an innovation and change capability to transform 35 primary care clinics in six months. All of the clinics were certified by the state of Minnesota as complying with their healthcare standards. Clinical outcomes, costs, and employee and physician engagement also increased. All of the improved measures are sustained.

Healthcare reform in the United States struggles because the organization design challenges are great and the change difficulties even greater. Fairview’s experience provides important evidence and lessons that can help advance our understanding of effective healthcare and create more sustainable healthcare systems. This chapter provides healthcare system administrators evidence and alternatives in the pursuit of implementation.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the current landscape of health information technology (HIT) in early accountable care organizations (ACOs), the different strategies ACOs are using to develop HIT-based capabilities, and how ACOs are using these capabilities within their care management processes to advance health outcomes for their patient population.

Mixed methods study pairing data from a cross-sectional National Survey of ACOs with in-depth, semi-structured interviews with leaders from 11 ACOs (both completed in 2013).

Early ACOs vary widely in their electronic health record, data integration, and analytic capabilities. The most common HIT capability was drug-drug and drug-allergy interaction checks, with 53.2 percent of respondents reporting that the ACO possessed the capability to a high degree. Outpatient and inpatient data integration was the least common HIT capability (8.1 percent). In the interviews, ACO leaders commented on different HIT development strategies to gain a more comprehensive picture of patient needs and service utilization. ACOs realize the necessity for robust data analytics, and are exploring a variety of approaches to achieve it.

Data are self-reported. The qualitative portion was based on interviews with 11 ACOs, limiting generalizability to the universe of ACOs but allowing for a range of responses.

ACOs are challenged with the development of sophisticated HIT infrastructure. They may benefit from targeted assistance and incentives to implement health information exchanges with other providers to promote more coordinated care management for their patient population.

Using new empirical data, this study increases understanding of the extent of ACOs’ current and developing HIT capabilities to support ongoing care management.

The implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act has facilitated the development of an innovative and integrated delivery care system, Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). It is timely, to identify how health care managers in rural health clinics (RHCs) are responding to the ACO model. This research examines RHC managers’ perceived benefits and barriers for implementing ACOs from an organizational ecology perspective.

A survey was conducted in spring of 2012 covering the present RHC network working infrastructures – (1) Organizational social network; (2) organizational care delivery structure; (3) ACO knowledge, perceived benefits, and perceived barriers; (4) quality and disease management programs; and (5) health information technology (HIT) infrastructure. One thousand one hundred sixty clinics were surveyed in the United States. They cover eight southeastern states (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee) and California. A total of 91 responses were received.

RHC managers’ personal perceptions on ACO’s benefits and knowledge level explained the most variance in their willingness to join ACOs. Individual perceptions appear to be more influential than organizational and context factors in the predictive analysis.

The study is primarily focused in the Southeastern region of the United States. The generalizability is limited to this region. The predictors of RHCs’ participation in ACOs are germane to guide the development of organizational strategies for enhancing the general knowledge about the innovativeness of delivering coordinated care and containing health care costs inspired by the Affordable Care Act.

RHCs are lagged behind the growth curve of ACO adoption. The diffusion of new knowledge about pros and cons of ACO is essential to reinforce the health care reform in the United States.

The article seeks to explain whether and how value-based healthcare principles lead to hybridization. The public management literature has been increasingly interested in hybrid forms of governance and hybrid performance management, but empirical studies are still rare. Further, the article studies the design of performance management and accounting systems as healthcare organizations reorganize their care processes applying value-based healthcare principles.

This article first connects the theoretical discussions on value-based healthcare and performance management for hybrids. The conceptual understanding of performance management in hybrid healthcare uses a case study of a Finnish healthcare organization with documentary data and transcribed interviews with healthcare professionals from both the strategic and operative levels of healthcare.

The article illustrates and analyses how new policy-level objectives and principles of value-based healthcare led to hybridity in healthcare, manifest in mixed ownership of a particular care path and new forms of social and financial control. Further, the article provides empirical evidence of how increased hybridity necessitated new organizational modes and roles, new managerial tools for performance management and created a need to develop the capability to account and measure entire integrated care processes. Important enabling factors for the integration of care and hybrid performance management were commitment created in dialogue, voluntary-based trust and technology to generate factual shared information.

The study is informative for stakeholders, funders and managers of healthcare organizations, namely new knowledge for the discussion of hybrid governance in healthcare, including a critical account of the applicability and impact of a hybrid service model in healthcare management. Moreover, the article illustrates what needs to be reconsidered in performance management and accounting practices when reorganizing care processes according to the principles of value-based healthcare.

The article extends the analysis of performance management in hybrids and sheds new light on hybridization in healthcare. It also provides much-needed empirical evidence on the processes and practices of accounting and performance management after implementing a value-based healthcare strategy.

This paper aims to examine the concept of sustainability in health care organizations and the key managerial competencies and change management strategies needed to implant a culture of sustainability. Competencies and management development strategies needed to engrain this corporate culture of sustainability are analyzed in this document.

This paper draws on the experience of the authors as health care executives and educators developing managerial competencies with interdisciplinary and international groups of executives in the last 25 years, using direct observation, interviews, discussions and bibliographic evidence.

With a holistic framework for sustainability, health care managers can implement strategies for multidisciplinary teams to respond to the constant change, fine-tune operations and successfully manage quality of care. Managers can mentor students and provide in-service learning experiences that integrate knowledge, skills, and abilities.

Further empirical research needs to be conducted on these interrelated innovative topics.

Health care organizations around the world are under stakeholders' pressure to provide high quality, cost-effective, accessible and sustainable services. Professional organizations and health care providers can collaborate with university graduate health management education programs to prepare competent managers in all the dimensions of sustainability.

The newly designated accountable care organizations represent an opportunity for managers to address the need for sustainability.

Sustainability of health care organizations with the holistic approach discussed in this paper is an innovative and practical approach to quality improvement that merits further development.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the community dynamics and organizational characteristics of US hospitals that participate in accountable care organizations (ACO).

Data were obtained from the 2015 American Hospital Association annual survey and the 2015 medicare final rule standardizing file. The study evaluated 785 hospitals which operate ACO in contrast to 1,446 hospitals without an ACO.

In total, 89 percent of hospitals using ACO’s are located in urban communities and 87 percent are not-for-profit. Hospitals with a higher case mix index are more likely to have an ACO.

ACOs allow healthcare organizations to expand their geographic markets, achieve greater efficiencies, and enhance the development of new clinical services. They also shift the focus of care from acute care hospitalization to the full continuum of care.

This research found ACOs with hospital and physician networks are an effective mechanism to control healthcare costs and reduce medical errors.