1
|
Krczal E, Behrens DA. Trust-building in temporary public health partnerships: a qualitative study of the partnership formation process of a Covid-19 test, trace and protect service. BMC Health Serv Res 2024; 24:467. [PMID: 38614970 PMCID: PMC11015697 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-10930-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Accepted: 03/29/2024] [Indexed: 04/15/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Public health initiatives require coordinated efforts from healthcare, social services and other service providers. Organisational theory tells us that trust is essential for reaching collaborative effectiveness. This paper explores the drivers for initiating and sustaining trust in a temporary public health partnership, in response to a sudden health threat. METHODS This qualitative study analysed the formation process of a multisector partnership for a Covid-19 contact tracing service. Data was collected through 12 interviews, two focus groups, one feedback workshop, and an online survey with workforce members from all seven partner organisations. Purposive maximum variation sampling was used to capture the reflections and experiences of workforce members from all seven partner organisations. A deductive code scheme was used to identify drivers for building and sustaining trust in inter-organisational collaboration. RESULTS Relational mechanisms emanating from the commitment to the common aim, shared norms and values, and partnership structures affected trust-building. Shared values and the commitment to the common aim appeared to channel partners' behaviour when interacting, resulting in being perceived as a fair, reliable and supportive partner. Shared values were congruent with the design of the partnership in terms of governance structure and communication lines reflecting flat hierarchies and shared decision-making power. Tensions between partner organisations arose when shared values were infringed. CONCLUSIONS When managing trust in a collaboration, partners should consider structural components like governance structure, organisational hierarchy, and communication channels to ensure equal power distribution. Job rotation, recruitment of candidates with the desired personality traits and attitudes, as well as training and development, encourage inter-organisational networking among employees, which is essential for building and strengthening relationships with partner organisations. Partners should also be aware of managing relational dynamics, channelling behaviours through shared values, objectives and priorities and fostering mutual support and equality among partner organisations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eva Krczal
- Department for Economy and Health, University of Continuing Education Krems, Krems, Austria.
| | - Doris A Behrens
- Department for Economy and Health, University of Continuing Education Krems, Krems, Austria
- Employee Wellbeing Service, Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, Caerleon, UK
- School of Mathematics, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kerrissey M, Jamakandi S, Alcusky M, Himmelstein J, Rosenthal M. Integration on the Frontlines of Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations and Associations With Perceived Care Quality, Health Equity, and Satisfaction. Med Care Res Rev 2023; 80:519-529. [PMID: 37232171 DOI: 10.1177/10775587231173474] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
Amid enthusiasm about accountable care organizations (ACOs) in Medicaid, little is known about the primary care practices engaging in them. We leverage a survey of administrators within a random sample (stratified by ACO) of 225 practices joining Massachusetts Medicaid ACOs (64% response rate; 225 responses). We measure the integration of processes with distinct entities: consulting clinicians, eye specialists for diabetes care, mental/behavioral care providers, and long-term and social services agencies. Using multivariable regression, we examine organizational correlates of integration and assess integration's relationships with care quality improvement, health equity, and satisfaction with the ACO. Integration varied across practices. Clinical integration was positively associated with perceived care quality improvement; social service integration was positively associated with addressing equity; and mental/behavioral and long-term service integration were positively associated with ACO satisfaction (all p < .05). Understanding differences in integration at the practice level is vital for sharpening policy, setting expectations, and supporting improvement in Medicaid ACOs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Matthew Alcusky
- University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, USA
| | - Jay Himmelstein
- University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Millar R, Aunger JA, Rafferty AM, Greenhalgh J, Mannion R, McLeod H, Faulks D. Towards achieving interorganisational collaboration between health-care providers: a realist evidence synthesis. HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE DELIVERY RESEARCH 2023; 11:1-130. [PMID: 37469292 DOI: 10.3310/kplt1423] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/21/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ross Millar
- Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Justin Avery Aunger
- Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Anne Marie Rafferty
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Joanne Greenhalgh
- School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Russell Mannion
- Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Hugh McLeod
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hearld LR, Westra D. Charting a Course: A Research Agenda for Studying the Governance of Health Care Networks. Adv Health Care Manag 2022; 21:111-132. [PMID: 36437619 DOI: 10.1108/s1474-823120220000021006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Networked forms of organizing in health care are increasingly viewed as an effective means of addressing "wicked", multifaceted health and societal challenges. This is because networks attempt to address these challenges via collaborative approaches in which diverse stakeholders together define the problem(s) and implement solutions. Consequently, there has been a sharp increase in the number and types of networks used in health care. Despite this growth, our understanding of how these networks are governed has not kept pace. The purpose of this chapter is to chart a research agenda for scholars who are interested in studying health care network governance (i.e., the systems of rules and decision-making within networks), which is of particular importance in deliberate networks between organizations. We do so based on our knowledge of the literature and interviews with subject matter experts, both of which are used to identify core network governance concepts that represent gaps in our current knowledge. Our analysis identified various conceptualizations of networks and of their governance, as well as four primary knowledge gaps: "bread and butter" studies of network governance in health care, the role of single organizations in managing health care networks, governance through the life-cycle stages of health care networks, and governing across the multiple levels of health care networks. We first seek to provide some conceptual clarity around networks and network governance. Subsequently, we describe some of the challenges that researchers may confront while addressing the associated knowledge gaps and potential ways to overcome these challenges.
Collapse
|
5
|
Murray GF, Lewis VA. Cross-Sector Strategic Alliances Between Health Care Organizations and Community-Based Organizations: Marrying Theory and Practice. Adv Health Care Manag 2022; 21:89-110. [PMID: 36437618 DOI: 10.1108/s1474-823120220000021005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
6
|
Murray GF, D'Aunno T, Lewis VA. Critical issues in alliances between management partners and accountable care organizations. Health Care Manage Rev 2021; 46:237-247. [PMID: 36800403 DOI: 10.1097/hmr.0000000000000263] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite widespread engagement of accountable care organizations (ACOs) with management partners, little empirical evidence on these alliances exists to inform policymakers or payers. Management partners may be providing a valuable service in facilitating the transition to population health management. Alternately, in some cases, partners may be receiving high fees relative to the value of services provided. PURPOSE The aim of this study was to use qualitative data to identify motivations for and critical issues in alliances between ACOs and management partners. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH We used qualitative data collected from seven ACOs (193 semistructured interviews and observational data from 12 site visits) to characterize the alliances between management partners and providers in ACOs. RESULTS We found that ACOs sought partners to provide financing, technical expertise, and risk bearing. Tensions in partnerships arose around resources (e.g., delivery on promised resources), control (e.g., who holds decision making authority), and values (e.g., commitment to safety net mission). Some partnerships persisted, whereas others dissolved. We found that there are two different underlying models of ACO-management partner alliances in our sample: (1) short-term partnerships aimed at organizational learning and (2) long-term partnerships based on complementarity. CONCLUSION Our results demonstrate how ACO alliances with management partners have unfolded as a kind of natural experiment in value-based payment reform. We expect that there is wide variation in quality, expertise, and delivery by management partners. Now multiple years into many of these alliances, we may address their value, strengths, and weaknesses from the perspective of providers as well as policy makers and payers. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Accountable care organization providers must determine whether a management partner is the best solution to the challenges they face and, if so, which alliance model to pursue. Policymakers and payers should consider short- and long-term implications of ACO-management partner alliances, including considering changing the regulatory environment.
Collapse
|
7
|
Aunger JA, Millar R, Greenhalgh J. When trust, confidence, and faith collide: refining a realist theory of how and why inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work. BMC Health Serv Res 2021; 21:602. [PMID: 34174873 PMCID: PMC8235919 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06630-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Health systems are facing unprecedented socioeconomic pressures as well as the need to cope with the ongoing strain brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, the reconfiguration of health systems to encourage greater collaboration and integration has been promoted with a variety of collaborative shapes and forms being encouraged and developed. Despite this continued interest, evidence for success of these various arrangements is lacking, with the links between collaboration and improved performance often remaining uncertain. To date, many examinations of collaborations have been undertaken, but use of realist methodology may shed additional light on how and why collaboration works, and whom it benefits. METHODS This paper seeks to test initial context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) of interorganisational collaboration with the view to producing a refined realist theory. This phase of the realist synthesis used case study and evaluation literature; combined with supplementary systematic searches. These searches were screened for rigour and relevance, after which CMOCs were extracted from included literature and compared against existing ones for refinement, refutation, or affirmation. We also identified demi-regularities to better explain how these CMOCs were interlinked. RESULTS Fifty-one papers were included, from which 338 CMOCs were identified, where many were analogous. This resulted in new mechanisms such as 'risk threshold' and refinement of many others, including trust, confidence, and faith, into more well-defined constructs. Refinement and addition of CMOCs enabled the creation of a 'web of causality' depicting how contextual factors form CMOC chains which generate outputs of collaborative behaviour. Core characteristics of collaborations, such as whether they were mandated or cross-sector, were explored for their proposed impact according to the theory. CONCLUSION The formulation of this refined realist theory allows for greater understanding of how and why collaborations work and can serve to inform both future work in this area and the implementation of these arrangements. Future work should delve deeper into collaborative subtypes and the underlying drivers of collaborative performance. REVIEW REGISTRATION This review is part of a larger realist synthesis, registered at PROSPERO with ID CRD42019149009 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Justin Avery Aunger
- Health Services Management Centre, Park House, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK.
| | - Ross Millar
- Health Services Management Centre, Park House, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
| | - Joanne Greenhalgh
- Sociology and Social Policy Department, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Aunger JA, Millar R, Greenhalgh J, Mannion R, Rafferty AM, McLeod H. Why do some inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work when others do not? A realist review. Syst Rev 2021; 10:82. [PMID: 33752755 PMCID: PMC7984506 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01630-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2020] [Accepted: 03/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Inter-organisational collaboration is increasingly prominent within contemporary healthcare systems. A range of collaboration types such as alliances, networks, and mergers have been proposed as a means to turnaround organisations, by reducing duplication of effort, enabling resource sharing, and promoting innovations. However, in practice, due to the complexity of the process, such efforts are often rife with difficulty. Notable contributions have sought to make sense of this area; however, further understanding is needed in order to gain a better understanding of why some inter-organisational collaborations work when others do not, to be able to more effectively implement collaborations in the future. METHODS Realist review methodology was used with the intention of formulating context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) to explain how inter-organisational collaborations work and why, combining systematic and purposive literature search techniques. The systematic review encompassed searches for reviews, commentaries, opinion pieces, and case studies on HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Social Policy and Practice databases, and further searches were conducted using Google Scholar. Data were extracted from included studies according to relevance to the realist review. RESULTS Fifty-three papers were included, informing the development of programme theories of how, why, and when inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work. Formulation of our programme theories incorporated the concepts of partnership synergy and collaborative inertia and found that it was essential to consider mechanisms underlying partnership functioning, such as building trust and faith in the collaboration to maximise synergy and thus collaborative performance. More integrative or mandated collaboration may lean more heavily on contract to drive collaborative behaviour. CONCLUSION As the first realist review of inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare as an intervention for improvement, this review provides actionable evidence for policymakers and implementers, enhancing understanding of mechanisms underlying the functioning and performing of inter-organisational collaborations, as well as how to configure the context to aid success. Next steps in this research will test the results against further case studies and primary data to produce a further refined theory. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42019149009.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Justin Avery Aunger
- Health Services Management Centre, Park House, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK.
| | - Ross Millar
- Health Services Management Centre, Park House, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
| | - Joanne Greenhalgh
- Sociology and Social Policy Department, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Russell Mannion
- Health Services Management Centre, Park House, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
| | - Anne-Marie Rafferty
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, SE1 8WA, UK
| | - Hugh McLeod
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol & NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West, 9th Floor, Whitefriars, Lewins Mead, Bristol, BS1 2NT, UK
| |
Collapse
|