Hospital Partnerships for Population Health: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Characteristics of hospital and health system initiatives to address social determinants of health in the United States: a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature

Background

Despite the incentives and provisions created for hospitals by the US Affordable Care Act related to value-based payment and community health needs assessments, concerns remain regarding the adequacy and distribution of hospital efforts to address SDOH. This scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature identifies the key characteristics of hospital/health system initiatives to address SDOH in the US, to gain insight into the progress and gaps.

Methods

PRISMA-ScR criteria were used to inform a scoping review of the literature. The article search was guided by an integrated framework of Healthy People SDOH domains and industry recommended SDOH types for hospitals. Three academic databases were searched for eligible articles from 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2023. Database searches yielded 3,027 articles, of which 70 peer-reviewed articles met the eligibility criteria for the review.

Results

Most articles (73%) were published during or after 2020 and 37% were based in Northeast US. More initiatives were undertaken by academic health centers (34%) compared to safety-net facilities (16%). Most (79%) were research initiatives, including clinical trials (40%). Only 34% of all initiatives used the EHR to collect SDOH data. Most initiatives (73%) addressed two or more types of SDOH, e.g., food and housing. A majority (74%) were downstream initiatives to address individual health-related social needs (HRSNs). Only 9% were upstream efforts to address community-level structural SDOH, e.g., housing investments. Most initiatives (74%) involved hot spotting to target HRSNs of high-risk patients, while 26% relied on screening and referral. Most initiatives (60%) relied on internal capacity vs. community partnerships (4%). Health disparities received limited attention (11%). Challenges included implementation issues and limited evidence on the systemic impact and cost savings from interventions.

Conclusion

Hospital/health system initiatives have predominantly taken the form of downstream initiatives to address HRSNs through hot-spotting or screening-and-referral. The emphasis on clinical trials coupled with lower use of EHR to collect SDOH data, limits transferability to safety-net facilities. Policymakers must create incentives for hospitals to invest in integrating SDOH data into EHR systems and harnessing community partnerships to address SDOH. Future research is needed on the systemic impact of hospital initiatives to address SDOH.

"Access to healthcare is a human right": a constructivist study exploring the impact and potential of a hospital-community partnered COVID-19 community response team for Toronto homeless services and congregate living settings

BACKGROUND

Individuals experiencing homelessness face unique physical and mental health challenges, increased morbidity, and premature mortality. COVID -19 creates a significant heightened risk for those living in congregate sheltering spaces. In March 2020, the COVID-19 Community Response Team formed at Women's College Hospital, to support Toronto shelters and congregate living sites to manage and prevent outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 using a collaborative model of onsite mobile testing and infection prevention. From this, the Women's College COVID-19 vaccine program emerged, where 14 shelters were identified to co-design and support the administration of vaccine clinics within each shelter. This research seeks to evaluate the impact of this partnership model and its future potential in community-centered integrated care through three areas of inquiry: (1) vaccine program evaluation and lessons learned; (2) perceptions on hospital/community partnership; (3) opportunities to advance hospital-community partnerships.

METHODS

Constructivist grounded theory was used to explore perceptions and experiences of this partnership from the voices of shelter administrators. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with administrators from 10 shelters using maximum variation purposive sampling. A constructivist-interpretive paradigm was used to determine coding and formation of themes: initial, focused, and theoretical.

RESULTS

Data analysis revealed five main categories, 16 subcategories, and one core category. The core category "access to healthcare is a human right; understand our communities" emphasizes access to healthcare is a consistent barrier for the homeless population. The main categories revealed during a time of confusion, the hospital was seen as credible and trustworthy. However, the primary focus of many shelters lies in housing, and attention is often not placed on health resourcing, solidifying partnerships, accountability, and governance structures therein. Health advocacy, information sharing tables, formalized partnerships and educating health professionals were identified by shelter administrators as avenues to advance intersectoral relationship building.

CONCLUSION

Hospital-community programs can alleviate some of the ongoing health concerns faced by shelters - during a time of COVID-19 or not. In preparation for future pandemics, access to care and cohesion within the health system requires the continuous engagement in relationship-building between hospitals and communities to support co-creation of innovative models of care, to promote health for all.

The Coproduction of Health Framework: Seeking Instructive Management Models and Theories

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.

Longitudinal Trends in Insurer Participation in Multisector Population Health Activities

Healthcare organizations increasingly engage in activities to identify and address social determinants of health (SDOH) among their patients to improve health outcomes and reduce costs. While several studies to date have focused on the evolving role of hospitals and physicians in these types of population health activities, much less is known about the role health insurers may play. We used data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Public Health Systems for the period 2006 to 2018 to examine trends in health insurer participation in population health activities and in the multi-sector collaborative networks that support these activities. We also used a difference-in-differences approach to examine the impact of Medicaid expansion on insurer participation in population health networks. Insurer participation increased in our study period both in the delivery of population health activities and in the integration into collaborative networks that support these activities. Insurers were most likely to participate in activities focusing on community health assessment and policy development. Results from our adjusted difference-in-differences models showed variation in association between insurer participation in population health networks and Medicaid expansion (Table 2). Population health networks in expansion states experienced significant increases insurer participation in assessment (4.48 percentage points, P < .05) and policy and planning (7.66 percentage points, P < .05) activities. Encouraging insurance coverage gains through policy mechanisms like Medicaid expansion may not only improve access to healthcare services but can also act as a driver of insurer integration into population health networks.

"Because There's Experts That Do That": Lessons Learned by Health Care Organizations When Partnering with Community Organizations

BACKGROUND

Health care organizations' partnerships with community-based organizations (CBOs) are increasingly viewed as key to improving patients' social needs (e.g., food, housing, and economic insecurity). Despite this reliance on CBOs, little research explores the relationships that health care organizations develop with CBOs.

OBJECTIVE

Understand how health care organizations interact with CBOs to implement social care.

DESIGN

Thirty-three semi-structured telephone interviews collected April-July 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

Administrators at 29 diverse health care organizations with active programming related to improving patients' social needs. Organizations ranged from multi-state systems to single-site practices and differed in structure, size, ownership, and geography.

MEASURES

Structure and goals of health care organizations' relationship with CBOs.

RESULTS

Most health care organizations (26 out of 29) relied on CBOs to improve their patients' social needs. Health care organization's goals for social care activities drove their relationships with CBOs. First, one-way referrals to CBOs did not require formal relationships or frequent interactions with CBOs. Second, when health care organizations contracted with CBOs to deliver discrete services, leadership-level relationships were required to launch programs while staff-to-staff interactions were used to maintain programs. Third, some health care organizations engaged in community-level activities with multiple CBOs which required more expansive, ongoing leadership-level partnerships. Administrators highlighted 4 recommendations for collaborating with CBOs: (1) engage early; (2) establish shared purpose for the collaboration; (3) determine who is best suited to lead activities; and (4) avoid making assumptions about partner organizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care organizations tailored the intensity of their relationships with CBOs based on their goals. Administrators viewed informal relationships with limited interactions between organizations sufficient for many activities. Our study offers key insights into how and when health care organizations may want to develop partnerships with CBOs.

An action research partnership in an urban Texas county to explore barriers and opportunities for collaborative community health needs assessments

Background

The Affordable Care Act mandated triennial community health needs assessments (CHNAs) for greater nonprofit hospital accountability in responding to community health needs. Over 10 years later, hospital spending on community benefits remains largely unchanged. While greater collaboration in CHNA implementation can increase hospital investment in community-based initiatives, nonprofit hospitals in conservative states are subject to policy, political, and economic factors that inhibit public health partnerships and magnify existing disparities in health care access. This participatory action research study explores the decision-making environment of collaborative CHNA implementation within a group of nonprofit hospitals in a north Texas urban county.

Methods

In 2017 faculty from an urban anchor institution initiated an academic-community partnership with a coalition of nonprofit hospitals, public health departments, and academic institutions. An interdisciplinary research team engaged in multi-method document review and qualitative data collection to describe historical barriers for local CHNA processes and develop practical strategies for joint CHNA initiatives. Local CHNA documents were first reviewed through team-based content analysis and results applied to develop a qualitative study protocol. Key informants were recruited from county-based nonprofit hospitals, community-based nonprofit organizations, and public health systems. Seventeen senior- and mid-level professionals participated in semi-structured research interviews to describe their perspectives relating to CHNA-related planning and implementation decisions. Through iterative data collection and analysis, the research team explored CHNA-related knowledge, experiences, and processes. A constructivist lens was subsequently applied to examine historical barriers and future opportunities for local collaboration.

Results

Findings reveal CHNA implementation is a multi-stage cyclical process in organizational environments with accountability to a wide range of public and private stakeholders. This promotes varied levels of inclusivity and conservatism in data collection and community benefit implementation. Decisions to collaborate are hindered by competing priorities, including compliance with existing guidelines, administrative simplicity, alignment with health care service delivery, and efficient resource use. Efforts to promote greater CHNA collaboration may be facilitated through intentional alignment with organizational priorities and clearly communicated benefits of participation for leaders in both public and private nonprofit health systems.

Discussion

We consider implications for policymakers and health systems in restrictive political environments and advance a conceptual framework for greater CHNA collaboration.

Development of a conceptual model of the capacity for patients to engage in their health care: a group concept mapping study

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement is seen as a necessary component in achieving the triple aim of improved population health, improved experience of care, and lower per capita health care costs. While there has been a substantial increase in the number of tools and patient-centered initiatives designed to help patients participate in health decisions, there remains a limited understanding of engagement from the perspective of patients and a lack of measures designed to capture the multi-faceted nature of the concept.

METHODS

Development of a concept map of patient engagement followed a five-step modified Group Concept Mapping (GCM) methodology of preparation, generation, structuring, analysis and interpretation. We engaged a Project Advisory Committee at each step, along with three rounds of survey collection from clinicians and patients for element generation (272 clinicians, 61 patients), statement sorting (30 clinicians, 15 patients), and ranking and rating of statements (159 clinicians, 67 patients). The survey of three separate samples, as opposed to focus groups of 'experts,' was an intentional decision to gain a broad perspective about the concept of patient engagement. We conducted the structure and analysis steps within the groupwisdom concept mapping software.

RESULTS

The final concept map comprised 47 elements organized into 5 clusters: Relationship with Provider, Patient Attitudes and Behaviors, Access, Internal Resources and External Resources. There was considerable agreement in the way elements in each cluster were rated by patients and clinicians. An analysis of the importance of the constitutive elements of patient engagement relative to their addressability highlighted actionable items in the domain of Relationship with Provider, aimed at building trust and enabling patients to ask questions. At the same time, the analysis also identified elements traditionally considered barriers to engagement, like personal access to the internet and the patient's level of digital literacy, as difficult to address by the healthcare system, but also relatively less important for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Through our GCM approach, incorporating perspectives of both patients and clinicians, we identified items that can be used to assess patient engagement efforts by healthcare systems. As a result, our study offers specific insight into areas that can be targeted for intervention by healthcare systems to improve patient engagement.

Organizational trust, usability, and inclusivity are key implementation facilitators for a proposed assets-based mobile health intervention

Assets-based interventions can address child health disparities by connecting families to existing community resources. Community collaboration when designing interventions may identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. The objective of this study was to identify crucial implementation considerations during the design phase of an asset-based intervention to address disparities in childhood obesity, Assets for Health. We conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with caregivers of children (<18 years) (N = 17) and representatives of community-based organizations (CBOs) which serve children and families (N = 20). Focus group and interview guides were developed based on constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis and matrices were used to identify common themes within and across groups of community members. Desired intervention characteristics included an easy-to-use list of community programs that could be filtered based on caregiver preferences and local community health workers to promote trust and engagement among Black and Hispanic/Latino families. Most community members felt an intervention with these characteristics could be advantageous versus existing alternatives. Key outer setting characteristics which were barriers to family engagement included families' financial insecurity and lack of access to transportation. The CBO implementation climate was supportive but there was concern that the intervention could increase staff workload beyond current capacity. Assessment of implementation determinants during the intervention design phase revealed important considerations for intervention development. Effective implementation of Assets for Health may depend on app design and usability, fostering organizational trust and minimizing the costs and staff workload of caregivers and CBOs, respectively.

Community Coalitions' Perspectives on Engaging with Hospitals in Ohio to Address the Opioid Crisis

Community coalitions have been leading the multisector response to the opioid epidemic in the Unites States. However, with the medicalization of opioid use disorder and changing health care policies, hospitals have moved to the forefront, becoming more active in collaborating with community coalitions. Little is currently known about how community coalitions view and approach collaborating with hospitals despite its importance for understanding and advancing interorganizational approaches to combating the opioid epidemic. Using data from semistructured interviews (n = 119) conducted from November 2019 to January 2020 as part of the HEALing Communities Study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04111939), the authors examined how community coalition members perceive hospital collaborations and explored the opportunities and challenges of these partnerships. They characterized 3 emergent themes: coalition approaches to collaborating with hospitals, barriers to collaboration, and opportunities for sustainable relationships. This new evidence highlights the value that coalitions place on hospital collaborations, as well as mechanisms that may help support ongoing partnerships.

Exploring the Role of Community Social Capital in Not-for-profit Hospitals’ Decision to Engage Community Partners in the Community Health Needs Assessment Process

Not-for-profit hospitals (NFPs) frequently partner with community organizations to conduct internal revenue service-mandated community health needs assessment (CHNA), yet little is known about the number of partnerships that hospitals enter into for this purpose. This article uses “American Hospital Associations’ 2020 Annual Survey” data to examine hospital-community partnerships around the CHNA and the role that community social capital defined as, “the networks that cross various professional, political and social boundaries to reflect community level trust needed to pursue shared objectives” plays in hospitals’ choices to partner with community organizations for the CHNA. After controlling for a set of hospital, community, and state characteristics, we found that hospitals present in communities with higher social capital were likely to partner with more community organizations to conduct CHNA. Greater social capital may thus promote community health by facilitating the partnerships NFPs develop with community organizations to conduct the CHNA.

Obamacare: A bibliometric perspective

Obamacare is the colloquial name given to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) signed into law by President Obama in the USA, which ultimately aims to provide universal access to health care services for US citizens. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the political-legal, economic, social, management (or administrative), and medical (or health) repercussions of this law, using a bibliometric methodology as a basis. In addition, the main contributors to research on ACA issues have been identified in terms of authors, organizations, journals, and countries. The downward trend in scientific production on this law has been noted, and it has been concluded that a balance has not yet been reached between the coexistence of private and public health care that guarantees broad social coverage without economic or other types of barriers. The law requires political consensus to be implemented in a definitive and global manner for the whole of the United States.