Removing Barriers to Partnerships (original) (raw)
Related papers
Using a Common Vision of Partners in Care to Enhance Hospital Collaborative Relationships
Journal of Research in Interprofessional Practice and Education
Background: Collaborative care is a philosophy that guides the work of interdisciplinary teams, patients, and their families internationally. Hospital organizations must create and cultivate environments to meet customer, health policy, and legislative mandates for improved collaborative care. This study aimed to inform and aid cultural change related to collaborative care relationships with the goal of improving the quality of care.Methods and Findings: A critical ethnography using mixed methodologies was conducted at a mid-sized non-acute hospital in Ontario, Canada. This article presents Phase 3 of a three-phase study that engaged senior leaders (SLs) in interviews about customer service and collaborative relationships. Phase 3 findings were triangulated with prior Phase 1 study results from healthcare providers (HCPs) and Phase 2 results from mid-level leaders (MLLs). The combined findings from all three phases formed a description of the organization’s culture (self-awareness, ...
Optimizing patient partnership in primary care improvement: A qualitative study
Health Care Management Review, 2019
Background: The need to expand and better engage patients in primary care improvement persists. Purpose: Recognizing a continuum of forms of engagement, this study focused on identifying lessons for optimizing patient partnerships, wherein engagement is characterized by shared decision-making and practice improvement codesign. Methodology: Twenty-three semistructured interviews with providers and patients involved in improvement efforts in seven U.S. primary care practices in the Academic Innovations Collaborative (AIC). The AIC aimed to implement primary care improvement, emphasizing patient engagement in the process. Data were analyzed thematically. Results: Sites varied in their achievement of patient partnerships, encountering material, technical, and sociocultural obstacles. Time was a challenge for all sites, as was engaging a diversity of patients. Technical training on improvement processes and shared learning "on the job" were important. External, organizational, and individuallevel resources helped overcome sociocultural challenges: The AIC drove provider buy-in, a team-based improvement approach helped shift relationships from providers and recipients toward teammates, and individual qualities and
BMC health services research, 2015
BackgroundForming partnerships is a prominent strategy used to promote integrated service delivery across health and social service systems. Evidence about the collaboration process upon which partnerships evolve has rarely been addressed in an integrated-care setting. This study explores the longitudinal relationship of the collaboration process and the influence on the final perceived success of a partnership in such a setting. The collaboration process through which partnerships evolve is based on a conceptual framework which identifies five themes: shared ambition, interests and mutual gains, relationship dynamics, organisational dynamics and process management.MethodsFifty-nine out of 69 partnerships from a national programme in the Netherlands participated in this survey study. At baseline, 338 steering committee members responded, and they returned 320 questionnaires at follow-up. Multiple-regression-analyses were conducted to explore the relationship between the baseline as ...
A model and typology of collaboration between professionals in healthcare organizations
BMC Health Services Research, 2008
The new forms of organization of healthcare services entail the development of new clinical practices that are grounded in collaboration. Despite recent advances in research on the subject of collaboration, there is still a need for a better understanding of collaborative processes and for conceptual tools to help healthcare professionals develop collaboration amongst themselves in complex systems. This study draws on D'Amour's structuration model of collaboration to analyze healthcare facilities offering perinatal services in four health regions in the province of Quebec. The objectives are to: 1) validate the indicators of the structuration model of collaboration; 2) evaluate interprofessional and interorganizational collaboration in four health regions; and 3) propose a typology of collaboration Methods: A multiple-case research strategy was used. The cases were the healthcare facilities that offer perinatal services in four health regions in the province of Quebec (Canada). The data were collected through 33 semi-structured interviews with healthcare managers and professionals working in the four regions. Written material was also analyzed. The data were subjected to a "mixed" inductive-deductive analysis conducted in two main stages: an internal analysis of each case followed by a cross-sectional analysis of all the cases.
BMC Health Services Research, 2019
Background: Around the world, many healthcare organizations engage patients as a quality improvement strategy. In Canada, the University of Montreal has developed a model which consists in partnering with patient advisors, providers, and managers in quality improvement. This model was introduced through its Partners in Care Programs tested with several quality improvement teams in Quebec, Canada. Partnering with patients in quality improvement brings about new challenges for healthcare managers. This model is recent, and little is known about how managers contribute to implementing and sustaining it using key practices. Methods: In-depth multi-level case studies were conducted within two healthcare organizations which have implemented a Partners in Care Program in quality improvement. The longitudinal design of this research enabled us to monitor the implementation of patient partnership initiatives from 2015 to 2017. In total, 38 interviews were carried out with managers at different levels (top-level, mid-level, and front-line) involved in the implementation of Partners in Care Programs. Additionally, seven focus groups were conducted with patients and providers. Results: Our findings show that managers are engaged in four main types of practices: 1-designing the patient partnership approach so that it makes sense to the entire organization; 2-structuring patient partnership to support its deployment and sustainability; 3-managing patient advisor integration in quality improvement to avoid tokenistic involvement; 4-evaluating patient advisor integration to support continuous improvement. Designing and structuring patient partnership are based on typical management practices used to implement change initiatives in healthcare organizations, whereas managing and evaluating patient advisor integration require new daily practices from managers. Our results reveal that managers at all levels, from top to front-line, are concerned with the implementation of patient partnership in quality improvement. Conclusion: This research adds empirical support to the evidence regarding daily managerial practices used for implementing patient partnership initiatives in quality improvement and contributes to guiding healthcare organizations and managers when integrating such approaches.
Evaluating the Impact of Partnerships to Improve Clinical Quality
The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 2007
Background: Translating research into practice and policy is a complex process that links the research enterprise and health care delivery system of the United States. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Partnerships for Quality (PFQ) initiative expanded the scope of research translation beyond clinical practice, highlighting the role of strategic partners. A work group of AHRQ grantees developed a framework for systematic evaluation of the impact of strategic partnerships on research translation. Methods: The evaluation framework posits a hierarchy of impacts that cumulatively lead to observable patient outcomes. The evaluation framework captures (1) health care outcomes improvement, (2) clinical practice changes, (3) policies, procedures, and protocols, and (4) research and knowledge. After the framework and tool were subjected to face-validity critique among PFQ investigators, the concept of synergy was added. PFQ investigators pilottested the evaluation framework, and the PFQ tool was refined further. Results: Early feedback from PFQ grantees suggested that the framework is generalizable and potentially useful to guide investigators in capturing impacts of their work that might otherwise go unrecognized or trivialized. Discussion: The PFQ Evaluation Tool, a pragmatic approach for evaluating the impact of partnership-driven translation projects, provides a comprehensive evaluation of impacts, including synergistic outcomes.
Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, 2017
Health care involves the participation of patients, family, and a diverse team of often highly specialized health care professionals. Involvement of all these team members in a cooperative and coordinated way is essential to providing exceptional care. This article introduces key concepts relating to interprofessional collaborative teamwork. Approaches to measuring and studying collaboration and evidence demonstrating the benefits of collaboration are presented. The structural, psychological, and educational factors which may determine collaborative behaviour are described. Learning Objectives: By the end of this CME article, participants will be able to 1. Distinguish between multifunctional and interdisciplinary teams, 2. Define collaboration in a health care setting, 3. Describe the value of collaboration to patients, staff, and organizations, 4. Understand approaches to measuring collaboration, and 5. Identify factors that determine the ability of teams to collaborate. This article is a CME article and provides the equivalent of 2 hours of continuing education that may be applied to your professional development credit system. A 20-question multiple choice quiz follows this reading, and answers can be found on page 216. Please note that no formalized credit (Category A) is available from CAMRT.