Crossing and creating boundaries in healthcare innovation

A delicate balance: how physicians manage change towards collaborative care within their institutions

Purpose

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in 2020–2022, the immutable and fragmented character of our healthcare system changed. Healthcare professionals and their institutional leads proved remarkably agile and managed to change toward collaborative care. The purpose of this paper is to examine experiences with collaborative practice in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic in two regions in the Netherlands, to explore and understand the relationship between policy and practice and the potential development of new collaborative care routines.

Design/methodology/approach

Using a methodology informed by theories that have a focus on professional working practice (so called “activity theory”) or the institutional decision-makers (discursive institutionalism), respectively, the perspective of physicians on the relationship between policy and practice was explored. Transcripts of meetings with physicians from different institutions and medical specialities about their collaborative COVID-19 care were qualitatively analysed.

Findings

The findings show how change during COVID-19 was primarily initiated from the bottom-up. Cultural-cognitive and normative forces in professional, collaborative working practice triggered the creation of new relationships and sharing of resources and capacity. The importance of top-down regulatory forces from institutional leads was less evident. Yet, both (bottom-up) professional legitimacy and (top-down) institutional support are mentioned as necessary by healthcare professionals to develop and sustain new collaborative routines.

Practical implications

The COVID-19 crisis provided opportunity to build better healthcare infrastructure by learning from the responses to this pandemic. Now is the time to find ways to integrate new ways of working initiated from the bottom-up with those longstanding ones initiated from top-down.

Originality

This paper presents a combination of theories for understanding collaboration in healthcare, which can inform future research into collaborative care initiatives.

Together stronger: boundary work within an Australian systems-based prevention initiative

Complexity and systems science are increasingly used to devise interventions to address health and social problems. Boundaries are important in systems thinking, as they bring attention to the power dynamics that guide decision-making around the framing of a situation, and how it is subsequently tackled. Using complexity theory as an analytical frame, this qualitative exploratory study examined boundary interactions between local government and community health organizations during the operationalization of a systems-based initiative to prevent obesity and chronic diseases (Healthy Together Communities-HTCs) in Victoria, Australia. Across two HTC sites, data was generated through semi-structured interviews with 20 key informants, in mid-2015. Template analysis based on properties of complex systems was applied to the data. The dynamics of boundary work are explored using three case illustrations: alignment, boundary spanning and boundary permeability. Alignment was both a process and an outcome of boundary work, and occurred at strategic, operational and individual levels. Boundary spanning was an important mechanism to develop a unified collaborative approach, and ensure that mainstream initiatives reached disadvantaged groups. Finally, some boundaries exhibited different levels of permeability for local government and community health organizations. This influenced how each organization could contribute to HTC interventions in unique, yet complementary ways. The study of boundary work offers potential for understanding the mechanisms that contribute to the nonlinear behaviour of complex systems. The complementarity of partnering organizations, and boundary dynamics should be considered when designing and operationalizing multilevel, complex systems-informed prevention initiatives.

Collaboration with community connectors to improve primary care access for hardly reached people: a case comparison of rural Ireland and Australia

BACKGROUND

This study presents a way for health services to improve service access for hardly reached people through an exploration of how staff can find and collaborate with citizens (referred to as connectors) who span socio-cultural boundaries in their community. The study explored the local socio-cultural contexts of connectors' boundary spanning activities and if they are health related; boundary spanning occurring between connectors and health professionals at the interface of health systems and community; and the opportunities and barriers to actively seeking out and collaborating with community connectors to access marginalised and hardly reached people.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative case comparison from rural Ireland and Australia. Following purposive snow-ball sampling techniques to recruit participants, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 community informants, 21 healthcare staff and 32 connectors. Transcripts were coded and analysed using an inductive approach to ascertain categories and overall themes.

RESULTS

We found a diverse sample of connectors relating to heterogenous, small and locally distinct groups of hardly reached people. Overall 26 connectors were active at the interface between health services and the community, with variation in how this occurred between cases. The majority (21) described one or more health related activities with hardly reached people. All connectors expressed a willingness to develop a relationship with local health services on issues they identified as relevant. Barriers to collaborations between connectors and health services related to bureaucracy, workload, and burnout.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborating with connectors has potential as one strategy to improve access to health services for hardly reached people. To enact this, health staff need to identify local socio-cultural boundaries and associated connectors, facilitate two-way connections at the boundary between health services and community and enable collaboration by attending to activities in the community, at the interface between health services and community, and within the health system.

Boundary spanning practices of community connectors for engaging 'hardly reached' people in health services

Global health policies direct health services to improve access and health outcomes of people who are 'hardly reached' by services. The institutionalised nature of health services with associated professional and organisational boundaries create ongoing challenges to achieving this policy aim. We present an approach to this challenge by exploring how health services can tap into the existing boundary spanning activities of community members we term as 'community connectors' who undertake valuable boundary work within the community to include people who are hardly reached. We address the research questions: what are the behaviours and characteristics of community connectors?; to what extent are they motivated to help out with health?; and how can health service personnel identify community connectors? We conducted an instrumental case study during 2017 in Victoria, Australia in the catchment area of a rural health service. Interviews with 17 key informants and eight staff members led to a further 15 interviews with community connectors. We identified the three key roles of 'noticer and responder', 'connector' and 'provider' that make connectors a valuable asset for health services. Community connectors seek opportunities to negotiate new boundaries with health services that support their boundary spanning with people hardly reached and also enable health services to transgress their own boundaries and access people who are hardly reached. We conclude that by paying attention to their own production, maintenance and transgression of boundaries, health services can apply this approach, noting that the local and iterative nature of identifying community connectors means that each cohort of community connectors will be unique as determined by local boundaries and relationships.

Inter-occupational cooperation and boundary work in the hospital setting

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to add a little piece to the research on boundary work and inter-occupational cooperation by addressing two questions: how do actors perform boundary work in an inter-occupational cooperation project that seeks to improve the personnel health work in a hospital setting? What impact does the boundary work have on such cooperation in the personnel health project? Design/methodology/approach The study is based on individual, in-depth interviews and participative observations of focus group discussions conducted at a regional municipal organization in Sweden. Respondents are hospital line managers, experts and strategists in the HR departments, and experts from the internal occupational health service. Findings The concepts on boundary work, which include closing/opening boundary strategies, provide the framework for the empirical illustrations. The cooperation runs smoothly in the rehabilitation work because of an agreed upon process in which the professionals' jurisdictions are preserved through closing strategies. Illness prevention and health promotion are not areas of inter-occupational cooperation because the stronger actors use closing strategies. While the weaker actors, who try to cooperate, use opening boundary strategies in these areas, they are excluded or marginalized. Research limitations/implications The empirical investigation concerns one cooperation project and was completed at one data collection point. Originality/value No similar study of boundary work and inter-occupational cooperation in a hospital setting is available despite the frequency of this professional group configuration in practice. A more inclusive concept of professionalism may facilitate the study of boundary work and inter-occupational cooperation among actors with different professional authority.