Measuring partnership synergy and functioning: Multi-stakeholder collaboration in primary health care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Loban E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8162647 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Partnerships are an important mechanism to tackle complex problems that extend beyond traditional organizational divides. Partnerships are widely endorsed, but there is a need to strengthen the evidence base relating to claims of their effectiveness. This article presents findings from a mixed methods study conducted with the aim of understanding partnership processes and how various partnership factors contribute to partnership effectiveness. The study involved five multi-stakeholder partnerships in Canada and Australia working towards improving accessibility to primary health care for vulnerable populations. Qualitative data were collected through the observation of 14 partnership meetings and individual semi-structured interviews (n = 16) and informed the adaptation of an existing Partnership Self-Assessment Tool. The instrument was administered to five partnerships (n = 54). The results highlight partnership complexity and the dynamic and contingent nature of partnership processes. Synergistic action among multiple stakeholders was achieved through enabling processes at the interpersonal, operational and system levels. Synergy was associated with partnership leadership, administration and management, decision-making, the ability of partnerships to optimize the involvement of partners and the sufficiency of non-financial resources. The Partnership Synergy framework was useful in assessing the intermediate outcomes of ongoing partnerships when it was too early to assess the achievement of long-term intended outcomes.
| S-EPMC8394800 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn low- and middle-income countries, public-private partnerships (PPPs) are often used to support the delivery of primary health care (PHC). We explore the processes of collaboration in a corporate social responsibility investment in PHC that was delivered through a PPP model in Western Province, Papua New Guinea, in 2009-2018 to strengthen PHC services.MethodsQualitative interviews were conducted with stakeholders in the PPP (N=20). Key program documents were also reviewed. Data were coded using a general inductive approach, and Actor-Network Theory (ANT) was used to frame the analysis.ResultsFour dominant themes emerged: (1) interpersonal relationships accelerate collaboration, (2) collaboration requires time, (3) formal governance structures encourage collaboration, and (4) internal change disrupts collaboration. The research provides insight into the role of collaboration for more efficient, effective, and impactful design and implementation of PPP for PHC. It makes suggestions for how ANT may be used when designing PPPs and for the ongoing management of relationships between partners. We found ANT to be a useful framework to conceptualize the complex dynamics between the "actors" within the PPP and to identify opportunities for improvement where structural changes may be made to circumvent issues that may compromise effective collaboration.ConclusionCollaboration is key to the success of PPPs for PHC. We found collaboration is not formulaic but is driven by actors, relationships, time, and governance. ANT can assist in designing, understanding, and managing the complex relationships between stakeholders of a PPP, who often come with diverse agendas, experiences, values, and perspectives.
| S-EPMC10906555 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The ABCD National Research Partnership was formed in mid-2010 as a collaboration to harness the expertise, experiences and resources of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled peak bodies, government and research organisations to improve the quality of Indigenous primary health care. The aim of this study was to apply social network methods to assess collaboration and functioning of the Partnership at two time-points. Methods: A social network analysis (SNA) survey was conducted in early 2013, with a follow-up survey in mid-2014. In the two survey rounds, online surveys were emailed to one senior person of the organisation participating in the Partnership (2013: 14 organisations; 2014: 11 organisations). The surveys collected data on respondent perceptions of the Partnership as well as social network relationship data. Social network methods were used to apply standardised metrics to assess how well the partnership was functioning as a collaborative three years into its operation, and in its fourth year. Results: Most respondents rated the Partnership as successful in progressing toward its goals. Network density and centrality scores show a well-connected partnership spanning different organisational types and states/territories (Northern Territory, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, and Far-West New South Wales). High centrality scores reflect high connectivity between key hubs in the network, contributing toward the shared goal of improved Indigenous primary health care. Network diagrams show key structural positions by organisational type, the frequency and intensity of interactions and the strengths and potential vulnerabilities in the partnership network, with comparisons at two time points for the partnership. Conclusions: The study found that the Partnership was effective in securing collaboration across its partners. Partners' contribution of resources reflected their active involvement. There was a high level of agreement on the achievement of the key goals of the Partnership, showing shared sense-making amongst partners. SNA tools assisted with monitoring the network over time to develop strategies supporting connections between partners for sustaining collaborative learning. Study findings identify successful approaches for a research partnership to improve quality of care in Indigenous primary health care and provide encouragement for wider applications for research partnerships and collaborations in Australia and internationally.
| S-EPMC6026655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:Aberrant pharmacogenetic variants occur in a high proportion of people and might be relevant for the prescription of over 26 drugs in primary care. Early identification of patients who metabolize these drugs more rapidly or slowly than average could predict therapeutic effectivity and safety. Yet implementation of pharmacogenetics is progressing slowly. A high public health impact can potentially be achieved by increasing the proportion of people tested, when and where eligible according to clinical validity and utility. Methods:In this study we defined actions, roles, and responsibilities for implementation of pharmacogenetics in primary care in consultation with stakeholder groups, by using a three-step mixed-methods approach. First, to define barriers and facilitators, public pharmacists (n = 24), primary care physicians (n = 8), and patients (n = 21) participated in focus groups and face-to-face interviews. Second, a multidisciplinary expert meeting (n = 16) was organized to define desired actions, roles, and responsibilities. Third, an online Delphi Study (n = 18) was conducted to prioritize the designated actions. Results:For the integration of pharmacogenetics in primary care guidelines and practice, lack of evidence for clinical utility was mentioned as a main barrier. Furthermore, reimbursement, and facilitation of data registration and sharing were considered as key elements for future routine application of pharmacogenetic testing. Moreover, the division of roles and responsibilities, especially between general practitioners and pharmacists, is currently perceived as unclear. Sixteen actions in these four areas (clinical utility, reimbursement, data registration and sharing, and roles and responsibilities) were formulated and assigned to specific actors during the expert meeting. After ranking these 16 actions in the Delphi Study, nine actions remained pertinent, covering the four areas with at least one action. However, participants showed low agreement on the prioritization of the different actions, illustrating their different perspectives and the need to attune between them. Discussion:Stakeholders together were able to formulate required actions to achieve true integration of pharmacogenetics in primary care, but no consensus could be achieved on the prioritization of the actions. Coordination of the current independent initiatives by the different stakeholders could facilitate effective and efficient implementation of useful pharmacogenetics in primary care.
| S-EPMC7006602 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGiven the challenges of governments to deliver primary health care (PHC), engaging private sector in the form of public-private partnership (PPP) can be effective policy. The aim of present study is to review the experiences of implementing PPP policy in PHC.MethodsThis scoping review study was conducted in 2019 using the framework proposed by Arkesy and O'Malley. Required data were collected through search the related keywords in databases, manual search of some journals, websites, and other sources of information and through references check, from January 2000 to May 2019. All studies, which focused on the results of PPP in PHC, and published in English or Persian were included in the study.ResultsA total of 108 articles were included in the study. The studies were mostly conducted in low- and middle-income countries. The quantitative studies have demonstrated the success of this policy in improving PHC indicators. Based on the qualitative studies PPP in PHC has many benefits, including access improvement, economic benefits, and service quality enhancement.ConclusionsThe present study provides useful information on the experiences of different countries in the field of PPP in PHC that can be used by experts and decision makers to decide whether to engage the private sector in the form of PPP model.
| S-EPMC7453464 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPublic health and primary care are distinct sectors within western health care systems. Within each sector, work is carried out in the context of organizations, for example, public health units and primary care clinics. Building on a scoping literature review, our study aimed to identify the influencing factors within these organizations that affect the ability of these health care sectors to collaborate with one another in the Canadian context. Relationships between these factors were also explored.MethodsWe conducted an interpretive descriptive qualitative study involving in-depth interviews with 74 key informants from three provinces, one each in western, central and eastern Canada, and others representing national organizations, government, or associations. The sample included policy makers, managers, and direct service providers in public health and primary care.ResultsSeven major organizational influencing factors on collaboration were identified: 1) Clear Mandates, Vision, and Goals; 2) Strategic Coordination and Communication Mechanisms between Partners; 3) Formal Organizational Leaders as Collaborative Champions; 4) Collaborative Organizational Culture; 5) Optimal Use of Resources; 6) Optimal Use of Human Resources; and 7) Collaborative Approaches to Programs and Services Delivery.ConclusionWhile each influencing factor was distinct, the many interactions among these influences are indicative of the complex nature of public health and primary care collaboration. These results can be useful for those working to set up new or maintain existing collaborations with public health and primary care which may or may not include other organizations.
| S-EPMC5992823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:Multi-professional collaboration (MPC) is essential for the delivery of effective and comprehensive care services. As in other European countries, primary care in Norway is challenged by altered patient values and the increased expectations of health administrations to participate in team-based care. This scoping review reports on the organisational, processual, relational and contextual facilitators of collaboration between general practitioners (GP) and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) in primary care. Methods:A systematic search in specialist and Scandinavian databases retrieved 707 citations. Following the inclusion criteria, nineteen studies were considered eligible and examined according to Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for scoping reviews. The retrieved literature was analysed employing a content analysis approach. A group of stakeholders commented on study findings to enhance study validity. Results:Primary care research into MPC is immature and emerging in Norway. Our analysis showed that introducing common procedures for documentation and handling of patient data, knowledge sharing, and establishing local specialised multi-professional teams, facilitates MPC. The results indicate that advancements in work practices benefit from an initial system-level foundation with focus on local management and MPC leadership. Further, our results show that it is preferable to enhance collaborative skills before introducing new professional teams, roles and responsibilities. Investing in professional relations could build trust, respect and continuity. In this respect, sufficient time must be allocated during the working day for professionals to share reflections and engage in mutual learning. Conclusion:There is a paucity of research concerning the application and management of MPC in Norwegian primary care. The work practices and relations between professionals, primary care institutions and stakeholders on a macro level is inadequate. Health care is a complex system in which HCPs need managerial support to harvest the untapped benefits of MPC in primary care. As international research demonstrates, local managers must be supported with infrastructure on a macro level to understand the embedding of practice and look at what professionals actually do and how they work.
| S-EPMC6137624 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo implement and assess a collaborative experience between Primary Care (PC) and Mental Health (MH) in order to improve the care of patients with depression.DesignPilot collaborative project from a participatory action research approach during 2013.LocationBasque Country. Osakidetza (Basque Health Service). Bizkaia and Gipuzkoa.ParticipantsThe study included 207 professionals from general practice, nursing, psychiatry, psychiatric nursing, psychology and social work of 9 health centres and 6 mental health centres of Osakidetza.InterventionsShared design and development of four axes of intervention: 1) Communication and knowledge between PC and MH professionals, 2) Improvement of diagnostic coding and referral of patients, 3) Training programmes with meetings and common Clinical Practice Guidelines, and 4) Evaluation.Main measurementsIntervention and control questionnaires to professionals of the centres on the knowledge and satisfaction in the PC-MH relationship, joint training activities, and assessment of the experience. Osakidetza registers of prevalences, referrals and treatments. Follow-up meetings.ResultsImprovement in the 4 axes of intervention in the participant centres compared with the controls. Identification of factors to be considered in the development and sustainability of PC-MH collaborative care.ConclusionsThe pilot experience confirms that collaborative projects promoted by PC and MH can improve depression care and the satisfaction of professionals. They are complex projects that need simultaneous interventions adjusted to the particularities of the health services. Multidisciplinary and continuous participation and management and information system support are necessary for their implementation.
| S-EPMC6877855 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:With the 40th anniversary of the Declaration of Alma-Ata, a global effort is underway to re-focus on strengthening primary health care systems, with emphasis on leveraging community health workers (CHWs) towards the goal of achieving universal health coverage for all. Institutionalizing effective, sustainable community health systems is currently limited by a lack of standard metrics for measuring CHW performance and the systems they work within. Developed through iterative consultations, supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and in partnership with USAID and UNICEF, this paper details a framework, list of indicators, and measurement considerations for monitoring CHW performance in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS:A review of peer-reviewed articles, reports, and global data collection tools was conducted to identify key measurement domains in monitoring CHW performance. Three consultations were successively convened with global stakeholders, community health implementers, advocates, measurement experts, and Ministry of Health representatives using a modified Delphi approach to build consensus on priority indicators. During this process, a structured, web-based survey was administered to identify the importance and value of specific measurement domains, sub-domains, and indicators determined through the literature reviews and initial stakeholder consultations. Indicators with more than 75% support from participants were further refined with expert qualitative input. RESULTS:Twenty-one sub-domains for measurement were identified including measurement of incentives for CHWs, supervision and performance appraisal, data use, data reporting, service delivery, quality of services, CHW absenteeism and attrition, community use of services, experience of services, referral/counter-referral, credibility/trust, and programmatic costs. Forty-six indicators were agreed upon to measure the sub-domains. In the absence of complete population enumeration and digitized health information systems, the quality of metrics to monitor CHW programs is limited. CONCLUSIONS:Better data collection approaches at the community level are needed to strengthen management of CHW programs and community health systems. The proposed list of metrics balances exhaustive and pragmatic measurement of CHW performance within primary healthcare systems. Adoption of the proposed framework and associated indicators by CHW program implementors may improve programmatic effectiveness, strengthen their accountability to national community health systems, drive programmatic quality improvement, and plausibly improve the impact of these programs.
| S-EPMC6868857 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Health systems in Canada and elsewhere are at a crossroads of reform in response to rising economic and societal pressures. The Quadruple Aim advocates for: improving patient experience, reducing cost, advancing population health and improving the provider experience. It is at the forefront of Canadian reform debates aimed to improve a complex and often-fragmented health care system. Concurrently, collaboration between primary care and public health has been the focus of current research, looking for integrated community-based primary health care models that best suit the health needs of communities and address health equity. This study aimed to explore the nature of Canadian primary care - public health collaborations, their aims, motivations, activities, collaboration barriers and enablers, and perceived outcomes. METHODS:Ten case studies were conducted in three provinces (Nova Scotia, Ontario, and British Columbia) to elucidate experiences of primary care and public health collaboration in different settings, contexts, populations and forms. Data sources included a survey using the Partnership Self-Assessment Tool, focus groups, and document analysis. This provided an opportunity to explore how primary care and public health collaboration could serve in transforming community-based primary health care with the potential to address the Quadruple Aims. RESULTS:Aims of collaborations included: provider capacity building, regional vaccine/immunization management, community-based health promotion programming, and, outreach to increase access to care. Common precipitators were having a shared vision and/or community concern. Barriers and enablers differed among cases. Perceived barriers included ineffective communication processes, inadequate time for collaboration, geographic challenges, lack of resources, and varying organizational goals and mandates. Enablers included clear goals, trusting and inclusive relationships, role clarity, strong leadership, strong coordination and communication, and optimal use of resources. Cases achieved outcomes addressing the Q-Aims such as improving access to services, addressing population health through outreach to at-risk populations, reducing costs through efficiencies, and improving provider experience through capacity building. CONCLUSIONS:Primary care and public health collaborations can strengthen community-based primary health care while addressing the Quadruple Aims with an emphasis on reducing health inequities but requires attention to collaboration barriers and enablers.
| S-EPMC7164182 | biostudies-literature