Review of the multi-hospital arrangements literature: benefits, disadvantages and lessons for implementation

Towards achieving interorganisational collaboration between health-care providers: a realist evidence synthesis

Background

Interorganisational collaboration is currently being promoted to improve the performance of NHS providers. However, up to now, there has, to the best of our knowledge, been no systematic attempt to assess the effect of different approaches to collaboration or to understand the mechanisms through which interorganisational collaborations can work in particular contexts.

Objectives

Our objectives were to (1) explore the main strands of the literature about interorganisational collaboration and to identify the main theoretical and conceptual frameworks, (2) assess the empirical evidence with regard to how different interorganisational collaborations may (or may not) lead to improved performance and outcomes, (3) understand and learn from NHS evidence users and other stakeholders about how and where interorganisational collaborations can best be used to support turnaround processes, (4) develop a typology of interorganisational collaboration that considers different types and scales of collaboration appropriate to NHS provider contexts and (5) generate evidence-informed practical guidance for NHS providers, policy-makers and others with responsibility for implementing and assessing interorganisational collaboration arrangements.

Design

A realist synthesis was carried out to develop, test and refine theories about how interorganisational collaborations work, for whom and in what circumstances.

Data sources

Data sources were gathered from peer-reviewed and grey literature, realist interviews with 34 stakeholders and a focus group with patient and public representatives.

Review methods

Initial theories and ideas were gathered from scoping reviews that were gleaned and refined through a realist review of the literature. A range of stakeholder interviews and a focus group sought to further refine understandings of what works, for whom and in what circumstances with regard to high-performing interorganisational collaborations.

Results

A realist review and synthesis identified key mechanisms, such as trust, faith, confidence and risk tolerance, within the functioning of effective interorganisational collaborations. A stakeholder analysis refined this understanding and, in addition, developed a new programme theory of collaborative performance, with mechanisms related to cultural efficacy, organisational efficiency and technological effectiveness. A series of translatable tools, including a diagnostic survey and a collaboration maturity index, were also developed.

Limitations

The breadth of interorganisational collaboration arrangements included made it difficult to make specific recommendations for individual interorganisational collaboration types. The stakeholder analysis focused exclusively on England, UK, where the COVID-19 pandemic posed challenges for fieldwork.

Conclusions

Implementing successful interorganisational collaborations is a difficult, complex task that requires significant time, resource and energy to achieve the collaborative functioning that generates performance improvements. A delicate balance of building trust, instilling faith and maintaining confidence is required for high-performing interorganisational collaborations to flourish.

Future work

Future research should further refine our theory by incorporating other workforce and user perspectives. Research into digital platforms for interorganisational collaborations and outcome measurement are advocated, along with place-based and cross-sectoral partnerships, as well as regulatory models for overseeing interorganisational collaborations.

Study registration

The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019149009.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

How, when, and why do inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work? A realist evaluation

BACKGROUND

Inter-organisational collaborations (IOCs) in healthcare have been viewed as an effective approach to performance improvement. However, there remain gaps in our understanding of what helps IOCs function, as well as how and why contextual elements affect their implementation. A realist review of evidence drawing on 86 sources has sought to elicit and refine context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) to understand and refine these phenomena, yet further understanding can be gained from interviewing those involved in developing IOCs.

METHODS

We used a realist evaluation methodology, adopting prior realist synthesis findings as a theoretical framework that we sought to refine. We drew on 32 interviews taking place between January 2020 and May 2021 with 29 stakeholders comprising IOC case studies, service users, as well as regulatory perspectives in England. Using a retroductive analysis approach, we aimed to test CMOCs against these data to explore whether previously identified mechanisms, CMOCs, and causal links between them were affirmed, refuted, or revised, and refine our explanations of how and why interorganisational collaborations are successful.

RESULTS

Most of our prior CMOCs and their underlying mechanisms were supported in the interview findings with a diverse range of evidence. Leadership behaviours, including showing vulnerability and persuasiveness, acted to shape the core mechanisms of collaborative functioning. These included our prior mechanisms of trust, faith, and confidence, which were largely ratified with minor refinements. Action statements were formulated, translating theoretical findings into practical guidance.

CONCLUSION

As the fifth stage in a larger project, our refined theory provides a comprehensive understanding of the causal chain leading to effective collaborative inter-organisational relationships. These findings and recommendations can support implementation of IOCs in the UK and elsewhere. Future research should translate these findings into further practical guidance for implementers, researchers, and policymakers.

Health care quality from the perspective of health care providers and patients during and shortly after acute care restructuring in Newfoundland and Labrador

Objectives

To monitor changes in providers' perceptions of health care quality and the importance of health reform, and in patients' satisfaction with services during and two years after restructuring, comparing the region of the province that was restructured (StJohn's) with those regions in which hospitals were not aggregated.

Methods

The Employee Attitude Survey questionnaire was sent to acute care providers (n=5353) to assess personal characteristics and perceptions of the impact of reform on workplace conditions, work-related attitudes and turnover intentions. The response rate for 2000 and 2002 was 42% (n=1222 and1034, respectively). Only respondents in both surveys (n=589) were used in the analysis because study results were the same for both the repeat sample and total samples. A Patient Satisfaction Survey questionnaire was administered to patients discharged from acute care facilities in 2000 (n=1741) and 2002 (n=704). Response rates were 82.5% and 90.2%, respectively.

Results

Most providers felt, at both time periods, that restructuring of the health care system was a positive step, but felt that health care quality was low. In the StJohn's region, perceptions of quality and standards of care improved over time. Patients were extremely satisfied with the admission process and hospital stay at both time periods in StJohn's. However, satisfaction declined in 2002 in regions outside StJohn's.

Conclusions

Aggregation of acute care hospitals is possible without adverse effects on providers' perceptions of health care quality or on patient satisfaction.

Rhetorics of Efficiency, Fashion and Politics

Drawing on a content analysis of discourse surrounding five sequential hospital merger decisions, this research examines the role of efficiency considerations, fashion and politics in stimulating the adoption of a managerial idea. The article analyses how different arguments come to be intertwined. It illustrates how rational and institutional arguments are used to legitimate political strategies while simultaneously constituting the apparatus of legitimation for others in a reciprocal process that contributes to the persistence of those same strategies. The article thus confirms the key role of politics, interests and agency in the evolution and constitution of institutions, and in the diffusion of managerial ideas.

Program theory evaluation: Logic analysis

Program theory evaluation, which has grown in use over the past 10 years, assesses whether a program is designed in such a way that it can achieve its intended outcomes. This article describes a particular type of program theory evaluation-logic analysis-that allows us to test the plausibility of a program's theory using scientific knowledge. Logic analysis is useful for improving the intervention or finding alternatives for achieving intended outcomes; it influences the choice of type of evaluation to conduct and strengthens the validity of subsequent evaluations. The objective of this article is to present the methodological principles and the roots of this type of program theory evaluation. We illustrate two types of logic analysis with two actual evaluation cases. There are very few published examples of program theory evaluation. This article will provide evaluators with both theoretical and practical information to help them in conceptualizing their evaluations.

Integrating services for patients with mental and substance use disorders: What matters?

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, practice standards have recommended that people suffering from both mental and substance use disorders receive integrated treatment. Yet, few institutions offer integrated services, and patients are too often turned away from psychiatric and addiction rehabilitation services.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to identify key factors in integrating services for patients with co-occurring disorders.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a process evaluation with the aim of identifying factors that enhance or impede service integration. First, we elaborated a sound conceptual framework of service integration. We then conducted in-depth case studies analysis using socioanthropological methods (interviews with managers and professionals, focus groups with patients, nonparticipant observation, and document analysis). We analyzed two contrasted forms of services integration, a joint venture and a strategic alliance, separately and then compared them.

FINDINGS

The integrations achieved in the two cases were of different intensities. However, from our study, we were able to identify various levers and characteristics that affect the development of an integrated approach. Reflecting on the dynamics of these two cases, we formulated six propositions to identify what matters when integrating services for persons with mental and substance use disorders.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The integration of services transcends debates on care models and must be focused on the patients' experience of care. The process should stimulate a learning experience that helps to align practices (normative integration) and to integrate teams and care. In this study, we identified a number of key conditions and levers for success.

Beyond the limitations of best practices: how logic analysis helped reinterpret dual diagnosis guidelines

The co-occurrence of mental health and substance use disorders is becoming increasingly recognized as a single problem, and professionals recognize that both should be addressed at the same time. Medical best practices recommend integrated treatment. However, criticisms have arisen, particularly concerning the difficulty of implementing integrated teams in specific health-care contexts and the appropriateness of the proposed model for certain populations. Using logic analysis, we identify the key clinical and organizational factors that contribute to successful implementation. Building on both the professional and organizational literatures on integrated services, we propose a conceptual model that makes it possible to analyze integration processes and places integrated treatment within an interpretative framework. Using this model, it becomes possible to identify key factors necessary to support service integration, and suggest new models of practice adapted to particular contexts.

An investigation into the level and impact of merger activity amongst hospitals in the UK's National Health Service

Since 1990 the National Health Service (NHS) has undergone a sustained period of change. This change has been necessary to prepare the NHS for the task of meeting a demand for services that continues to rise more rapidly than the availability of resources. Anecdotal evidence suggests that one of the most popular ways for trusts to improve their ability to meet demand is through mergers with other trusts. However, little rigorous research has been conducted to assess the extent or effectiveness of this strategy. A research project was, therefore, initiated to better understand the extent and impact of merger activity within the NHS. A questionnaire was developed and distributed to the chief executive, finance director, medical director and human resources director in all the 460 trusts that are currently members of the NHS confederation. In total the survey generated 459 responses out of a possible total of 1,840; an encouraging response rate of 25 per cent. The results of this research provide significant new evidence that "merger mania" has taken hold within the NHS. While 46 per cent of all responding trusts indicated that they had already merged, are actively involved in a merger, proposing to merge or are talking to prospective partners, a further 18.7 per cent of all trusts are forming strategic alliances rather than opting for a full merger. The dominant justification for merging are the beliefs that it will facilitate the reconfiguration of services and ultimately improve patient care. The paper concludes with a discussion of the significance of these results, before making recommendations with regard to their implications for future merger activity within the NHS.

Governance in a period of strategic change in U.S. healthcare

The increased enrollment in managed care plans, merger mania and the development of politically and financially powerful integrated delivery systems have significantly complicated the governance of U.S. healthcare organizations. These modifications in fiscal incentives and the corporate restructuring undertaken by American health organizations has resulted in limited fiscal savings or improvements in access to care. As a result, trustees are now faced with divesting their losers, and shuttering facilities and services to reduce fixed costs. Decision-making by trustees will be further thwarted in the future by: their institutions being forced to deliver more care without a proportional increase in revenues; physicians seeking to obtain more ambulatory revenues at a hospital's expense; the inability to adequately finance mental health and long-term care services except among the wealthy; the number of divestitures increasing so that eventually the organizational focus for most IDSs will once again be on regionally oriented hospital systems; and much more difficulty being experienced in attracting sufficiently qualified personnel to deliver high quality health services. Finally, many of these findings relevant to the United States also are being shared by governing boards in Canada, Germany, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

Horizontal mergers in the United States health field: some practical realities

During the past decade, 'merger mania' has been a striking trend in the US health field as a strategy to improve the integration of services, to reduce expenses, and to increase the ability of providers to manage risk-based payment. However, during the past quarter of a century limited operational and fiscal evidence has been published in both the health and general management literature that strongly supports the efficacy of horizontal mergers. This article further argues that a likely scenario over the next decade, in spite of disappointments among these mergers in effecting significant cost reductions, is for the US health networks to continue acquiring additional providers and insurers. After these alliances gain significant market penetration, they are expected to behave as oligopolists. For these mergers to eventually achieve their earlier projected savings, the health field's leadership will be forced to implement cost-cutting measures such as: more vigorously coordinating the network's key clinical services to reduce competition for revenues among the partners within an alliance, closing superfluous hospitals and centralizing expensive tertiary services, encouraging surplus physicians to relocate to under-served areas, and providing direction to carefully integrate the best elements of what the competitive and regulatory strategies are able to offer to improve access, social equity, quality of care, and to reduce total health expenditures.

A framework for assessing the performance of integrated health delivery systems

Competing demands for resources within the health care system require health care providers to ensure the most effective and efficient use of resources. The evidence from the United States, the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions suggests that integrated health delivery systems (IDS) may be a cost-effective way to meet the health care needs of a population. This article introduces a framework for use in monitoring and evaluating the performance of an integrated delivery system. The establishment of a consistently used evaluation framework for integrated delivery systems will provide the government, governing bodies and other evaluators with an effective assessment tool that will enable greater understanding of the impact of the IDS on the health care system. It will also provide information to enable ongoing performance improvements within the system.