Implementing COVID-19 Surveillance Through Inter-Organizational Coordination: A Qualitative Study of Three Cities in Colombia

Introducing comprehensive surveillance is recommended as an urgent public health measure to control and mitigate the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide. However, its implementation has proven challenging as it requires inter-organizational coordination among multiple healthcare stakeholders. The purpose of this study was to examine the role of soft and hard mechanisms in the implementation of inter-organizational coordination strategies for COVID-19 surveillance within Colombia, drawing on evidence from the cities of Bogotá, Cali and Cartagena. The study used a case study approach to understand the perspectives of local and national authorities, insurance companies and health providers in the implementation of inter-organizational coordination strategies for COVID-19 surveillance. Eighty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted between June and November 2020. The data were analysed by codes and categorized using New NVivo software. The study identified inter-organizational coordination strategies that were implemented to provide COVID-19 surveillance in the three cities. Both soft (e.g. trust and shared purpose) and hard mechanisms (e.g. formal agreements and regulations) acted as mediators for collaboration and helped to address existing structural barriers in the provision of health services. The findings suggest that soft and hard mechanisms contributed to promoting change among healthcare system stakeholders and improved inter-organizational coordination for disease surveillance. The findings contribute to evidence regarding practices to improve coordinated surveillance of disease, including the roles of new forms of financing and contracting between insurers and public and private health service providers, logistics regarding early diagnosis in infectious disease and the provision of health services at the community level regardless of insurance affiliation. Our research provides evidence to improve disease surveillance frameworks in fragmented health systems contributing to public health planning and health system improvement.

Understanding the Development, Evaluation, and Sustainability of Community Health Networks Using Social Network Analysis: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Identify the scope of the literature which reports use of social network analysis to inform, support, or evaluate health promotion-focused community network/partnership development.

DATA SOURCE

A comprehensive search (not date-limited) of PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, and the Cochrane Library Database for Systematic Reviews.

INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Criteria for inclusion included published in the English language and used social network analysis to inform, support, or evaluate development of community networks/partnerships aiding health promotion efforts. Studies were excluded if they did not use social network analysis or were not focused upon health promotion.

DATA EXTRACTION

Three of the four authors extracted data using a summary chart to document information regarding study aims, target issue/population, methods, and key outcomes of the social network analysis.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The extracted data were qualitatively analyzed by 3 authors to categorize key social network analysis outcomes into categories.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven studies representing 9 geographical regions were included, with the majority (69) published after 2010. Key outcomes included the effectiveness of social network analysis to identify network characteristics, track network change over time, compare similar networks across locations, and correlate network attributes with outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Findings support the utility of social network analysis to inform, support, and evaluate development of sustainable health promotion-focused networks/partnerships.

Assessing the Delivery of Coordinated Care to Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease in Ontario, Canada: A Survey of Patients and Healthcare Professionals

Introduction:

Patients with advanced Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) have complex health needs, and thus require care that is coordinated across professionals and organizations. This study aimed to describe the extent of coordinated care delivery for patients with advanced CKD from the perspectives of both patients and healthcare professionals.

Methods:

The Coordination Scale of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-26) survey was administered to a random sample of 14,257 patients on maintenance dialysis or receiving care in end-stage kidney disease preparation clinics in Ontario, Canada. A five-item survey was administered to 596 multidisciplinary nephrology professionals.

Results:

Among the 1,925 patient respondents, 67% reported they had been referred to an allied health professional; 19% had been encouraged to attend programs in the community; and 34% had been told how their visits with other types of doctors helped their treatment (% reporting “always” or “most of the time”). Patient responses were significantly different by treatment modality/setting, but not by gender or geographic location of treatment facility. Among the 276 professional respondents, 37% reported their patients’ care was well-coordinated across settings; 56% reported participating in interdisciplinary care planning discussions; and 53% reported they are aware of appropriate home and community services to support their patients (% reporting “always” or “most of the time”).

Conclusion:

The results suggest that care for patients with advanced CKD in Ontario is not consistently coordinated. Healthcare professionals may enhance patient perceptions of coordinated care through explicit communication with patients about how the professionals they see and treatments or services they receive influence their overall health and well-being. At a systems level, there is a need to improve professional awareness of and linkages to home- and community-based services.

The Emergence and Unfolding of Telemonitoring Practices in Different Healthcare Organizations

Telemonitoring, a sub-category of telemedicine, is promoted as a solution to meet the challenges in Western healthcare systems in terms of an increasing population of people with chronic conditions and fragmentation issues. Recent findings from large-scale telemonitoring programs reveal that these promises are difficult to meet in complex real-life settings which may be explained by concentrating on the practices that emerge when telemonitoring is used to treat patients with chronic conditions. This paper explores the emergence and unfolding of telemonitoring practices in relation to a large-scale, inter-organizational home telemonitoring program which involved 5 local health centers, 10 district nurse units, four hospitals, and 225 general practice clinics in Denmark. Twenty-eight interviews and 28 h of observations of health professionals and administrative staff were conducted over a 12-month period from 2014 to 2015. This study's findings reveal how telemonitoring practices emerged and unfolded differently among various healthcare organizations. This study suggests that the emergence and unfolding of novel practices is the result of complex interplay between existing work practices, alterations of core tasks, inscriptions in the technology, and the power to either adopt or ignore such novel practices. The study enhances our understanding of how novel technology like telemonitoring impacts various types of healthcare organizations when implemented in a complex inter-organizational context.

Reframing the challenges to integrated care: a complex-adaptive systems perspective

INTRODUCTION

Despite over two decades of international experience and research on health systems integration, integrated care has not developed widely. We hypothesized that part of the problem may lie in how we conceptualize the integration process and the complex systems within which integrated care is enacted. This study aims to contribute to discourse regarding the relevance and utility of a complex-adaptive systems (CAS) perspective on integrated care.

METHODS

In the Canadian province of Ontario, government mandated the development of fourteen Local Health Integration Networks in 2006. Against the backdrop of these efforts to integrate care, we collected focus group data from a diverse sample of healthcare professionals in the Greater Toronto Area using convenience and snowball sampling. A semi-structured interview guide was used to elicit participant views and experiences of health systems integration. We use a CAS framework to describe and analyze the data, and to assess the theoretical fit of a CAS perspective with the dominant themes in participant responses.

RESULTS

Our findings indicate that integration is challenged by system complexity, weak ties and poor alignment among professionals and organizations, a lack of funding incentives to support collaborative work, and a bureaucratic environment based on a command and control approach to management. Using a CAS framework, we identified several characteristics of CAS in our data, including diverse, interdependent and semi-autonomous actors; embedded co-evolutionary systems; emergent behaviours and non-linearity; and self-organizing capacity.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

One possible explanation for the lack of systems change towards integration is that we have failed to treat the healthcare system as complex-adaptive. The data suggest that future integration initiatives must be anchored in a CAS perspective, and focus on building the system's capacity to self-organize. We conclude that integrating care requires policies and management practices that promote system awareness, relationship-building and information-sharing, and that recognize change as an evolving learning process rather than a series of programmatic steps.

Collaborative working within UK NHS secondary care and across sectors for COPD and the impact of peer review: qualitative findings from the UK National COPD Resources and Outcomes Project

Introduction

We investigated the effects on collaborative work within the UK National Health Service (NHS) of an intervention for service quality improvement: informal, structured, reciprocated, multidisciplinary peer review with feedback and action plans. The setting was care for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Theory and methods

We analysed semi-structured interviews with 43 hospital respiratory consultants, nurses and general managers at 24 intervention and 11 control sites, as part of a UK randomised controlled study, the National COPD Resources and Outcomes Project (NCROP), using Scott's conceptual framework for action (inter-organisational, intra-organisational, inter-professional and inter-individual). Three areas of care targeted by NCROP involved collaboration across primary and secondary care.

Results

Hospital respiratory department collaborations with commissioners and hospital managers varied. Analysis suggested that this is related to team responses to barriers. Clinicians in unsuccessful collaborations told ‘atrocity stories’ of organisational, structural and professional barriers to service improvement. The others removed barriers by working with government and commissioner agendas to ensure continued involvement in patients' care. Multidisciplinary peer review facilitated collaboration between participants, enabling them to meet, reconcile differences and exchange ideas across boundaries.

Conclusions

The data come from the first randomised controlled trial of organisational peer review, adding to research into UK health service collaborative work, which has had a more restricted focus on inter-professional relations. NCROP peer review may only modestly improve collaboration but these data suggest it might be more effective than top-down exhortations to change when collaboration both across and within organisations is required.