16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      What works in implementation of integrated care programs for older adults with complex needs? A realist review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          A realist review of the evaluative evidence was conducted on integrated care (IC) programs for older adults to identify key processes that lead to the success or failure of these programs in achieving outcomes such as reduced healthcare utilization, improved patient health, and improved patient and caregiver experience.

          Data sources

          International academic literature was searched in 12 indexed, electronic databases and gray literature through internet searches, to identify evaluative studies.

          Study selection

          Inclusion criteria included evaluative literature on integrated, long-stay health and social care programs, published between January 1980 and July 2015, in English.

          Data extraction

          Data were extracted on the study purpose, period, setting, design, population, sample size, outcomes, and study results, as well as explanations of mechanisms and contextual factors influencing outcomes.

          Results of data synthesis

          A total of 65 articles, representing 28 IC programs, were included in the review. Two context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOcs) were identified: (i) trusting multidisciplinary team relationships and (ii) provider commitment to and understanding of the model. Contextual factors such as strong leadership that sets clear goals and establishes an organizational culture in support of the program, along with joint governance structures, supported team collaboration and subsequent successful implementation. Furthermore, time to build an infrastructure to implement and flexibility in implementation, emerged as key processes instrumental to success of these programs.

          Conclusions

          This review included a wide range of international evidence, and identified key processes for successful implementation of IC programs that should be considered by program planners, leaders and evaluators.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Integrated care programmes for chronically ill patients: a review of systematic reviews.

          To investigate effectiveness, definitions, and components of integrated care programmes for chronically ill patients on the basis of systematic reviews. Literature review from January 1996 to May 2004. Definitions and components of integrated care programmes and all effects reported on the quality of care. Searches in the Medline and Cochrane databases identified 13 systematic reviews of integrated care programmes for chronically ill patients. Despite considerable heterogeneity in interventions, patient populations, and processes and outcomes of care, integrated care programmes seemed to have positive effects on the quality of patient care. No consistent definitions were present for the management of patients with chronic illnesses. In all the reviews the aims of integrated care programmes were very similar, namely reducing fragmentation and improving continuity and coordination of care, but the focus and content of the programmes differed widely. The most common components of integrated care programmes were self-management support and patient education, often combined with structured clinical follow-up and case management; a multidisciplinary patient care team; multidisciplinary clinical pathways and feedback, reminders, and education for professionals. Integrated care programmes seemed to have positive effects on the quality of care. However, integrated care programmes have widely varying definitions and components and failure to recognize these variations leads to inappropriate conclusions about the effectiveness of these programmes and to inappropriate application of research results. To compare programmes and better understand the (cost) effectiveness of the programmes, consistent definitions must be used and component interventions must be well described.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            What fosters or prevents interprofessional teamworking in primary and community care? A literature review.

            The increase in prevalence of long-term conditions in Western societies, with the subsequent need for non-acute quality patient healthcare, has brought the issue of collaboration between health professionals to the fore. Within primary care, it has been suggested that multidisciplinary teamworking is essential to develop an integrated approach to promoting and maintaining the health of the population whilst improving service effectiveness. Although it is becoming widely accepted that no single discipline can provide complete care for patients with a long-term condition, in practice, interprofessional working is not always achieved. This review aimed to explore the factors that inhibit or facilitate interprofessional teamworking in primary and community care settings, in order to inform development of multidisciplinary working at the turn of the century. A comprehensive search of the literature was undertaken using a variety of approaches to identify appropriate literature for inclusion in the study. The selected articles used both qualitative and quantitative research methods. Following a thematic analysis of the literature, two main themes emerged that had an impact on interprofessional teamworking: team structure and team processes. Within these two themes, six categories were identified: team premises; team size and composition; organisational support; team meetings; clear goals and objectives; and audit. The complex nature of interprofessional teamworking in primary care meant that despite teamwork being an efficient and productive way of achieving goals and results, several barriers exist that hinder its potential from becoming fully exploited; implications and recommendations for practice are discussed. These findings can inform development of current best practice, although further research needs to be conducted into multidisciplinary teamworking at both the team and organisation level, to ensure that enhancement and maintenance of teamwork leads to an improved quality of healthcare provision.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Geriatric care management for low-income seniors: a randomized controlled trial.

              Low-income seniors frequently have multiple chronic medical conditions for which they often fail to receive the recommended standard of care. To test the effectiveness of a geriatric care management model on improving the quality of care for low-income seniors in primary care. Controlled clinical trial of 951 adults 65 years or older with an annual income less than 200% of the federal poverty level, whose primary care physicians were randomized from January 2002 through August 2004 to participate in the intervention (474 patients) or usual care (477 patients) in community-based health centers. Patients received 2 years of home-based care management by a nurse practitioner and social worker who collaborated with the primary care physician and a geriatrics interdisciplinary team and were guided by 12 care protocols for common geriatric conditions. The Medical Outcomes 36-Item Short-Form (SF-36) scales and summary measures; instrumental and basic activities of daily living (ADLs); and emergency department (ED) visits not resulting in hospitalization and hospitalizations. Intention-to-treat analysis revealed significant improvements for intervention patients compared with usual care at 24 months in 4 of 8 SF-36 scales: general health (0.2 vs -2.3, P = .045), vitality (2.6 vs -2.6, P < .001), social functioning (3.0 vs -2.3, P = .008), and mental health (3.6 vs -0.3, P = .001); and in the Mental Component Summary (2.1 vs -0.3, P < .001). No group differences were found for ADLs or death. The cumulative 2-year ED visit rate per 1000 was lower in the intervention group (1445 [n = 474] vs 1748 [n = 477], P = .03) but hospital admission rates per 1000 were not significantly different between groups (700 [n = 474] vs 740 [n = 477], P = .66). In a predefined group at high risk of hospitalization (comprising 112 intervention and 114 usual-care patients), ED visit and hospital admission rates were lower for intervention patients in the second year (848 [n = 106] vs 1314 [n = 105]; P = .03 and 396 [n = 106] vs 705 [n = 105]; P = .03, respectively). Integrated and home-based geriatric care management resulted in improved quality of care and reduced acute care utilization among a high-risk group. Improvements in health-related quality of life were mixed and physical function outcomes did not differ between groups. Future studies are needed to determine whether more specific targeting will improve the program's effectiveness and whether reductions in acute care utilization will offset program costs. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00182962.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Qual Health Care
                Int J Qual Health Care
                intqhc
                International Journal for Quality in Health Care
                Oxford University Press
                1353-4505
                1464-3677
                October 2017
                09 August 2017
                09 August 2017
                : 29
                : 5
                : 612-624
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College St., Toronto, Canada M5T 3M6
                [2 ]Department of Psychology, Wilfrid Laurier University, 75 University Ave. West, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3C5
                [3 ]Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College St., Toronto, Canada M5T 3M6
                [4 ] The Change Foundation, 200 Front Street West, Toronto, Canada M5V 3M1
                [5 ] Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond St., Toronto, Canada M5B 1W8
                [6 ] Toronto Central Local Health Integration Network, 250 Dundas St. West, Toronto, Canada M5T 2Z5
                [7 ] Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, 550 University Ave., Toronto, Canada M5G 2A2
                [8 ] Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, 2075 Bayview Ave., Toronto, Canada M4N 3M5
                Author notes
                [1 ]Address reprint requests to: Maritt Kirst, Department of Psychology, Wilfrid Laurier University, 75 University Ave. West, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3C5. Tel: +519-884-0710; Fax: +519-746-7605; E-mail: mkirst@ 123456wlu.ca
                Article
                mzx095
                10.1093/intqhc/mzx095
                5890872
                28992156
                bc6a917c-8494-4605-8042-bdfe86e42519
                © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 31 October 2016
                : 08 June 2017
                : 04 July 2017
                Page count
                Pages: 13
                Funding
                Funded by: Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care 10.13039/501100000226
                Categories
                Review Article

                Medicine
                integrated care,health and social care services,care coordination,older adults
                Medicine
                integrated care, health and social care services, care coordination, older adults

                Comments

                Comment on this article