Anita D Misra-Hebert1,2,3, Adam Perzynski4, Michael B Rothberg5,6, Jaqueline Fox6, Mary Beth Mercer7, Xiaobo Liu8, Bo Hu8, David C Aron9, Kurt C Stange10. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. misraa@ccf.org. 2. Center for Value-Based Care Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. misraa@ccf.org. 3. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. misraa@ccf.org. 4. Center for Health Care Research and Policy, Case Western Reserve University at MetroHealth, Cleveland, OH, USA. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 6. Center for Value-Based Care Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 7. Office of Patient Experience, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 8. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 9. Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. 10. Center for Community Health Integration, and Departments of Family Medicine and Community Health, Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Oncology and Sociology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Successful implementation of new care models within a health system is likely dependent on contextual factors at the individual sites of care. OBJECTIVE: To identify practice setting components contributing to uptake of new team-based care models. DESIGN: Convergent mixed-methods design. PARTICIPANTS: Employees and patients of primary care practices implementing two team-based models in a large, integrated health system. MAIN MEASURES: Field observations of 9 practices and 75 interviews, provider and staff surveys to assess adaptive reserve and burnout, analysis of quality metrics, and patient panel comorbidity scores. The data were collected simultaneously, then merged, thematically analyzed, and interpreted by a multidisciplinary team. KEY RESULTS: Based on analysis of observations and interviews, the 9 practices were categorized into 3 groups-high, partial, and low uptake of new team-based models. Uptake was related to (1) practices' responsiveness to change and (2) flexible workflow as related to team roles. Strength of local leadership and stable staffing mediated practices' ability to achieve high performance in these two domains. Higher performance on several quality metrics was associated with high uptake practices compared to the lower uptake groups. Mean Adaptive Reserve Measure and Maslach Burnout Inventory scores did not differ significantly between higher and lower uptake practices. CONCLUSION: Uptake of new team-based care delivery models is related to practices' ability to respond to change and to adapt team roles in workflow, influenced by both local leadership and stable staffing. Better performance on quality metrics may identify high uptake practices. Our findings can inform expectations for operational and policy leaders seeking to implement change in primary care practices.
BACKGROUND: Successful implementation of new care models within a health system is likely dependent on contextual factors at the individual sites of care. OBJECTIVE: To identify practice setting components contributing to uptake of new team-based care models. DESIGN: Convergent mixed-methods design. PARTICIPANTS: Employees and patients of primary care practices implementing two team-based models in a large, integrated health system. MAIN MEASURES: Field observations of 9 practices and 75 interviews, provider and staff surveys to assess adaptive reserve and burnout, analysis of quality metrics, and patient panel comorbidity scores. The data were collected simultaneously, then merged, thematically analyzed, and interpreted by a multidisciplinary team. KEY RESULTS: Based on analysis of observations and interviews, the 9 practices were categorized into 3 groups-high, partial, and low uptake of new team-based models. Uptake was related to (1) practices' responsiveness to change and (2) flexible workflow as related to team roles. Strength of local leadership and stable staffing mediated practices' ability to achieve high performance in these two domains. Higher performance on several quality metrics was associated with high uptake practices compared to the lower uptake groups. Mean Adaptive Reserve Measure and Maslach Burnout Inventory scores did not differ significantly between higher and lower uptake practices. CONCLUSION: Uptake of new team-based care delivery models is related to practices' ability to respond to change and to adapt team roles in workflow, influenced by both local leadership and stable staffing. Better performance on quality metrics may identify high uptake practices. Our findings can inform expectations for operational and policy leaders seeking to implement change in primary care practices.
Entities:
Keywords:
Health care delivery; Primary care redesign; Qualitative research
Authors: Carlos Roberto Jaén; Benjamin F Crabtree; Raymond F Palmer; Robert L Ferrer; Paul A Nutting; William L Miller; Elizabeth E Stewart; Robert Wood; Marivel Davila; Kurt C Stange Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: William L Miller; Benjamin F Crabtree; Paul A Nutting; Kurt C Stange; Carlos Roberto Jaén Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Sarah N Bobiak; Stephen J Zyzanski; Mary C Ruhe; Caroline A Carter; Brian Ragan; Susan A Flocke; David Litaker; Kurt C Stange Journal: Qual Manag Health Care Date: 2009 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 0.926
Authors: Benjamin F Crabtree; Paul A Nutting; William L Miller; Reuben R McDaniel; Kurt C Stange; Carlos Roberto Jaen; Elizabeth Stewart Journal: Med Care Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Christian D Helfrich; Joseph A Simonetti; Walter L Clinton; Gordon B Wood; Leslie Taylor; Gordon Schectman; Richard Stark; Lisa V Rubenstein; Stephan D Fihn; Karin M Nelson Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-02-23 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Karin M Nelson; Christian Helfrich; Haili Sun; Paul L Hebert; Chuan-Fen Liu; Emily Dolan; Leslie Taylor; Edwin Wong; Charles Maynard; Susan E Hernandez; William Sanders; Ian Randall; Idamay Curtis; Gordon Schectman; Richard Stark; Stephan D Fihn Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Jonathan G Shaw; Marcy Winget; Cati Brown-Johnson; Timothy Seay-Morrison; Donn W Garvert; Marcie Levine; Nadia Safaeinili; Megan R Mahoney Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2021 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Kristin Trane; Kristian Aasbrenn; Martin Rønningen; Sigrun Odden; Annika Lexén; Anne Landheim Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst Date: 2021-04-23