A systems perspective on gaps in the person-centered sick leave and rehabilitation process: a Swedish interview study.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Märit Löfgren, Karin Törnbom, Daniel Gyllenhammar, Lena Nordeman, Gun Rembeck, Cecilia Björkelund, Irene Svenningsson, Dominique Hange
{"title":"A systems perspective on gaps in the person-centered sick leave and rehabilitation process: a Swedish interview study.","authors":"Märit Löfgren, Karin Törnbom, Daniel Gyllenhammar, Lena Nordeman, Gun Rembeck, Cecilia Björkelund, Irene Svenningsson, Dominique Hange","doi":"10.1080/02813432.2024.2434123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Consensus on priorities to optimize the sick leave and rehabilitation process (SRP) is lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore perspectives of stakeholders in the SRP on bridging the gap between desired process scope, and actual practice, from a multi-professional, multi-organizational, and interdisciplinary approach.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Focus group interviews were conducted with various SRP frontline professionals in Region Västra Götaland, Sweden, using purposive sampling to capture a range of experiences. Participants discussed their perceptions of critical changes and priorities needed to meet patients' SRP needs in a primary care context. All interviews were analyzed using systematic text condensation, as described by Malterud.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>General practitioners (<i>n</i> = 6), rehabilitation coordinators and licensed healthcare professionals from primary healthcare (<i>n</i> = 13), administrators from the Social Insurance Agency, the Employment Agency and Social Services (<i>n</i> = 12).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Through data analysis, the following themes emerged: 1) The need for rules and regulations to enable coherent process governance 2) Challenges and opportunities in person-centered SRP: Professional collaboration, organizational priorities, and the need for enhanced leadership, and 3) Balancing resources and patient needs in the SRP: How to improve care quality and accessibility. In summary, participants mainly discussed how to improve process efficiency and quality of care while balancing available resources and a heavy workload. A main goal was to prevent negative spirals of suboptimal decision-making in individual cases, which could lead to increased work, unfortunate outcomes, and patient suffering.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This qualitative study indicated that gaps between a desired process scope and actual practice might be bridged by enabling coherent cross-organizational process governance, prioritizing person-centered ways of working, and balancing available resources and workload. The above changes were believed to improve process quality and overall efficiency.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The study project plan was pre-registered on September 21st, 2020, in the database FOU i VGR (researchweb.org), project number 274941.</p>","PeriodicalId":21521,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2024.2434123","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Consensus on priorities to optimize the sick leave and rehabilitation process (SRP) is lacking.

Objective: To explore perspectives of stakeholders in the SRP on bridging the gap between desired process scope, and actual practice, from a multi-professional, multi-organizational, and interdisciplinary approach.

Design and setting: Focus group interviews were conducted with various SRP frontline professionals in Region Västra Götaland, Sweden, using purposive sampling to capture a range of experiences. Participants discussed their perceptions of critical changes and priorities needed to meet patients' SRP needs in a primary care context. All interviews were analyzed using systematic text condensation, as described by Malterud.

Subjects: General practitioners (n = 6), rehabilitation coordinators and licensed healthcare professionals from primary healthcare (n = 13), administrators from the Social Insurance Agency, the Employment Agency and Social Services (n = 12).

Results: Through data analysis, the following themes emerged: 1) The need for rules and regulations to enable coherent process governance 2) Challenges and opportunities in person-centered SRP: Professional collaboration, organizational priorities, and the need for enhanced leadership, and 3) Balancing resources and patient needs in the SRP: How to improve care quality and accessibility. In summary, participants mainly discussed how to improve process efficiency and quality of care while balancing available resources and a heavy workload. A main goal was to prevent negative spirals of suboptimal decision-making in individual cases, which could lead to increased work, unfortunate outcomes, and patient suffering.

Conclusions: This qualitative study indicated that gaps between a desired process scope and actual practice might be bridged by enabling coherent cross-organizational process governance, prioritizing person-centered ways of working, and balancing available resources and workload. The above changes were believed to improve process quality and overall efficiency.

Trial registration: The study project plan was pre-registered on September 21st, 2020, in the database FOU i VGR (researchweb.org), project number 274941.

以人为中心的病假和康复过程中的差距的系统观点:瑞典访谈研究。
背景:在优化病假和康复过程(SRP)的优先事项上缺乏共识。目的:从多专业、多组织和跨学科的角度探讨SRP中利益相关者的观点,以弥合期望过程范围和实际实践之间的差距。设计和设置:对瑞典Västra Götaland地区的各种SRP一线专业人员进行焦点小组访谈,使用有目的的抽样来获取一系列经验。参与者讨论了他们对在初级保健环境中满足患者SRP需求的关键变化和优先事项的看法。如Malterud所述,所有访谈都使用系统的文本浓缩法进行分析。研究对象:全科医生(n = 6)、康复协调员和初级卫生保健专业人员(n = 13)、社会保险机构、职业介绍所和社会服务机构的管理人员(n = 12)。结果:通过数据分析,出现了以下主题:1)需要规则和法规来实现连贯的流程治理;2)以人为本的SRP面临的挑战和机遇:专业协作、组织优先级和加强领导的需求;3)SRP中资源和患者需求的平衡:如何提高护理质量和可及性。总之,与会者主要讨论了如何在平衡可用资源和繁重工作量的同时提高流程效率和护理质量。其主要目标是防止在个别案例中出现次优决策的负面循环,这可能导致工作量增加、不幸的结果和患者痛苦。结论:这个定性研究表明,期望的过程范围和实际实践之间的差距可以通过支持连贯的跨组织过程治理、优先考虑以人为中心的工作方式,以及平衡可用的资源和工作量来弥合。上述变化被认为可以提高工艺质量和整体效率。试验注册:本研究项目计划于2020年9月21日预注册,数据库为FOU i VGR (researchweb.org),项目编号274941。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
19.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is an international online open access journal publishing articles with relevance to general practice and primary health care. Focusing on the continuous professional development in family medicine the journal addresses clinical, epidemiological and humanistic topics in relation to the daily clinical practice. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is owned by the members of the National Colleges of General Practice in the five Nordic countries through the Nordic Federation of General Practice (NFGP). The journal includes original research on topics related to general practice and family medicine, and publishes both quantitative and qualitative original research, editorials, discussion and analysis papers and reviews to facilitate continuing professional development in family medicine. The journal''s topics range broadly and include: • Clinical family medicine • Epidemiological research • Qualitative research • Health services research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信