Dataset Information

Understanding the factors influencing the implementation of participatory interventions to improve care coordination. An analytical framework based on an evaluation in Latin America.

ABSTRACT: Healthcare coordination is considered key to improving care quality. Although participatory action research (PAR) has been used effectively to bridge the gap between evidence and practice in other areas, little is known about the key success factors of its use in healthcare organizations. This article analyses the factors influencing the implementation of PAR interventions to improve clinical coordination from the perspective of actors in public healthcare networks of Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Uruguay. A qualitative, descriptive-interpretative study was conducted in each country's healthcare network. Focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews were conducted to a criterion sample of: local steering committee (LSC) (29), professional platform (PP) (28), health professionals (49) and managers (28). Thematic content analysis was conducted, segmented by country and themes. The PAR process led by the LSC covered the return of baseline results, selection of problems and interventions and design, implementation and adjustment of the intervention, with PP. Interventions were implemented to improve communication and clinical agreement between primary and secondary care. Results reveal that contextual factors, the PAR process and the intervention's content influenced their implementation, interacting across time. First, institutional support providing necessary resources, and professionals' and managers' willingness to participate, emerge as contextual pivotal factors, influenced by other factors related to: the system (alignment with policy and political cycle), networks (lack of time due to work overload and inadequate working conditions) and individuals (not knowing each other and mutual mistrust). Second, different characteristics of the PAR process have a bearing, in turn, on institutional support and professionals' motivation: participation, flexibility, consensual decision-making, the LSC's leadership and the facilitating role of researchers. Evidence is provided that implementation through an adequate PAR process can become a factor of motivation and cohesion that is crucial to the adoption of care coordination interventions, leading to better results when certain contextual factors converge.

SUBMITTER: Vargas I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7553758 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Understanding the factors influencing the implementation of participatory interventions to improve care coordination. An analytical framework based on an evaluation in Latin America.

Vargas Ingrid I Eguiguren Pamela P Mogollón-Pérez Amparo-Susana AS Bertolotto Fernando F Samico Isabella I López Julieta J De Paepe Pierre P Vázquez María-Luisa ML

Health policy and planning 20201001 8

Healthcare coordination is considered key to improving care quality. Although participatory action research (PAR) has been used effectively to bridge the gap between evidence and practice in other areas, little is known about the key success factors of its use in healthcare organizations. This article analyses the factors influencing the implementation of PAR interventions to improve clinical coordination from the perspective of actors in public healthcare networks of Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Me ...[more]

PMID: 32743666

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Finding new strategies for care integration has become a policy priority for many fragmented health systems in Latin America. Although the implementation of interventions through a participatory action research (PAR) approach is considered to be more effective in achieving organizational change, its application is scarce. This study, part of the research project Equity-LA II, aims to analyze the impact of PAR interventions on care coordination across levels, and key aspects for their sustainability and transferability, from the stakeholder viewpoint in healthcare networks of Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Uruguay. Different interventions were designed and implemented through a PAR process to improve communication and clinical agreement between primary care and secondary care doctors: joint meetings to discuss clinical cases and/or training; shared care guidelines; offline virtual consultations; a referral and reply letter; and an induction program. METHODS:A qualitative, descriptive-interpretative study was conducted in the healthcare network of each country. Focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with a criterion sample of participants: local steering committee (29) and professional platform members (28), other health professionals (49) and managers (28). Thematic content analysis was conducted, segmented by country and type of intervention. RESULTS:Informants highlighted that joint meetings based on reflexive methods contributed substantially to improving contextually relevant elements of clinical management coordination - communication in patient follow-up, clinical agreement, appropriateness of referrals - and also administrative coordination. The meetings, alongside the PAR process, also helped to improve interaction between professionals - knowing each other personally and mutual trust - thus fostering willingness to collaborate. The PAR approach, moreover, served to spread awareness of the coordination problems and need for intervention, encouraging greater commitment and interest in participating. No noteworthy contributions were identified in remaining interventions due to low uptake. A necessary condition for the sustainability and replicability was that PAR process had to be used appropriately in a favourable context. CONCLUSIONS:Evidence is provided on the substantial contribution of interventions to improving locally relevant clinical coordination elements and professional interaction when implemented through an adequate PAR process (in terms of time, method and participation levels), a necessary condition for their sustainability and replicability.

Project description:BackgroundDespite increasing recommendations for health professionals to participate in intervention design and implementation to effect changes in clinical practice, little is known about this strategy's effectiveness. This study analyses the effectiveness of interventions designed and implemented through participatory action research (PAR) processes in healthcare networks of Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Uruguay to improve clinical coordination across care levels, and offers recommendations for future research.MethodsThe study was quasi-experimental. Two comparable networks, one intervention (IN) and one control (CN), were selected in each country. Baseline (2015) and evaluation (2017) surveys of a sample of primary and secondary care doctors (174 doctors/network/year) were conducted using the COORDENA® questionnaire. Most of the interventions chosen were based on joint meetings, promoting cross-level clinical agreement and communication for patient follow-up. Outcome variables were: a) intermediate: interactional and organizational factors; b) distal: experience of cross-level clinical information coordination, of clinical management coordination and general perception of coordination between levels. Poisson regression models were estimated.ResultsA statistically significant increase in some of the interactional factors (intermediate outcomes) -knowing each other personally and mutual trust- was observed in Brazil and Chile INs; and in some organizational factors -institutional support- in Colombia and Mexico. Compared to CNs in 2017, INs of Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Mexico showed significant differences in some factors. In distal outcomes, care consistency items improved in Brazil, Colombia and Uruguay INs; and patient follow-up improved in Chile and Mexico. General perception of clinical coordination increased in Brazil, Colombia and Mexico INs. Compared to CNs in 2017, only Brazil showed significant differences.ConclusionsAlthough more research is needed, results show that PAR-based interventions improved some outcomes regarding clinical coordination at network level, with differences between countries. However, a PAR process is, by definition, slow and gradual, and longer implementation periods are needed to achieve greater penetration and quantifiable changes. The participatory and flexible nature of interventions developed through PAR processes poses methodological challenges (such as defining outcomes or allocating individuals to different groups in advance), and requires a comprehensive mixed-methods approach that simultaneously evaluates effectiveness and the implementation process to better understand its outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundThere have been calls for greater consideration of applicability and transferability in systematic reviews, to improve their usefulness in informing policy and practice. Understanding how evidence is, or is not applicable and transferable to varying local situations and contexts, is a key challenge for systematic review synthesis in healthcare. Assessing applicability and transferability in systematic reviews is reported to be difficult, particularly in reviews of complex interventions. There is a need for exploration of factors perceived to be important by policy-makers, and for further guidance on which items should be reported. In this paper we focus on the process of development of a framework that can be used by systematic reviewers to identify and report data across studies relating to applicability and transferability.MethodsThe framework was developed by scrutinising existing literature on applicability and transferability, examining data during a systematic review of highly complex changes to health service delivery, and was informed by stakeholder engagement. The items of the framework were thus grounded in both data identified during a real review, and stakeholder input. The paper describes examples of data identified using the framework during a review of integrated care interventions, and outlines how it informed analysis and reporting of the review findings.ResultsThe Framework for Implementation Transferability Applicability Reporting (FITAR) comprises 44 items which can be used to structure analysis and reporting across studies during systematic reviews of complex interventions. The framework prompts detailed consideration of contextual data during extraction and reporting, within areas of: patient type and populations; type of organisations and systems; financial and commissioning processes; systems leadership elements; features of services; features of the workforce; and finally elements of the interventions/initiatives.ConclusionsUse of the framework during our review of complex healthcare interventions helped the review team to surface contextual data, which may not be commonly extracted, analysed and reported. Further exploration and evaluation of systems for identifying and reporting these factors during reviews is required.

Project description:Although fragmentation in the provision of services is considered an obstacle to effective health care, there is scant evidence on the impact of interventions to improve care coordination between primary care and secondary care in terms of continuity of care-i.e. from the patient perspective-particularly in Latin America (LA). Within the framework of the Equity-LA II project, interventions to improve coordination across care levels were implemented in five Latin American countries (Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Uruguay) through a participatory action research (PAR) process. This paper analyses the impact of these PAR interventions on the cross-level continuity of care of chronic patients in public healthcare networks. A quasi-experimental study was performed with measurements based on two surveys of a sample of patients with chronic conditions (392 per network; 800 per country). Both the baseline (2015) and evaluation (2017) surveys were conducted using the CCAENA questionnaire. In each country, two comparable public healthcare networks were selected, one intervention and one control. Outcomes were cross-level continuity of information and clinical management continuity. Descriptive analyses were conducted, and Poisson regression models with robust variance were fitted to estimate changes. With differences between countries, the results showed improvements in cross-level continuity of clinical information (transfer of clinical information) and clinical management continuity (care coherence). These results are consistent with those of previous studies on the effectiveness of the interventions implemented in each country in improving care coordination in Brazil, Chile and Colombia. Differences between countries are probably related to particular contextual factors and events that occurred during the implementation process. This supports the notion that certain context and process factors are needed to improve continuity of care. The results provide evidence that, although the interventions were designed to enhance care coordination and aimed at health professionals, patients report improvements in continuity of care.

Project description:In many Latin American countries, official influenza reports are neither timely nor complete, and surveillance of influenza-like illness (ILI) remains thin in consistency and precision. Public participation with mobile technology may offer new ways of identifying nonmedically attended cases and reduce reporting delays, but no published studies to date have assessed the viability of ILI surveillance with mobile tools in Latin America. We implemented and assessed an ILI-tailored mobile health (mHealth) participatory reporting system.The objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality and characteristics of electronically collected data, the user acceptability of the symptom reporting platform, and the costs of running the system and of identifying ILI cases, and to use the collected data to characterize cases of reported ILI.We recruited the heads of 189 households comprising 584 persons during randomly selected home visits in Guatemala. From August 2016 to March 2017, participants used text messages or an app to report symptoms of ILI at home, the ages of the ILI cases, if medical attention was sought, and if medicines were bought in pharmacies. We sent weekly reminders to participants and compensated those who sent reports with phone credit. We assessed the simplicity, flexibility, acceptability, stability, timeliness, and data quality of the system.Nearly half of the participants (47.1%, 89/189) sent one or more reports. We received 468 reports, 83.5% (391/468) via text message and 16.4% (77/468) via app. Nine-tenths of the reports (93.6%, 438/468) were received within 48 hours of the transmission of reminders. Over a quarter of the reports (26.5%, 124/468) indicated that at least someone at home had ILI symptoms. We identified 202 ILI cases and collected age information from almost three-fifths (58.4%, 118/202): 20 were aged between 0 and 5 years, 95 were aged between 6 and 64 years, and three were aged 65 years or older. Medications were purchased from pharmacies, without medical consultation, in 33.1% (41/124) of reported cases. Medical attention was sought in 27.4% (34/124) of reported cases. The cost of identifying an ILI case was US $6.00. We found a positive correlation (Pearson correlation coefficient=.8) between reported ILI and official surveillance data for noninfluenza viruses from weeks 41 (2016) to 13 (2017).Our system has the potential to serve as a practical complement to respiratory virus surveillance in Guatemala. Its strongest attributes are simplicity, flexibility, and timeliness. The biggest challenge was low enrollment caused by people's fear of victimization and lack of phone credit. Authorities in Central America could test similar methods to improve the timeliness, and extend the breadth, of disease surveillance. It may allow them to rapidly detect localized or unusual circulation of acute respiratory illness and trigger appropriate public health actions.

Dataset Information

Understanding the factors influencing the implementation of participatory interventions to improve care coordination. An analytical framework based on an evaluation in Latin America.

Publications

Understanding the factors influencing the implementation of participatory interventions to improve care coordination. An analytical framework based on an evaluation in Latin America.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets