Developing programme theories of leadership for integrated health and social care teams and systems: a realist synthesis

Ruth Harris, S. Fletcher, S. Sims, F. Ross, S. Brearley, J. Manthorpe
{"title":"Developing programme theories of leadership for integrated health and social care teams and systems: a realist synthesis","authors":"Ruth Harris, S. Fletcher, S. Sims, F. Ross, S. Brearley, J. Manthorpe","doi":"10.3310/wpng1013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n As the organisation of health and social care in England moves rapidly towards greater integration, the resulting systems and teams will require distinctive leadership. However, little is known about how the effective leadership of these teams and systems can be supported and improved. In particular, there is relatively little understanding of how effective leadership across integrated care teams and systems may be enacted, the contexts in which this might take place and the subsequent implications this has on integrated care.\n \n \n \n This realist review developed and refined programme theories of leadership of integrated health and social care teams and systems, exploring what works, for whom and in what circumstances.\n \n \n \n The review utilised a realist synthesis approach, informed by the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) publication standards, to explore existing literature on the leadership of integrated care teams and systems, complemented by ongoing stakeholder consultation. Empirical evidence specifically addressing leadership of integrated teams or services was limited, with only 36 papers included in the review. The evidence collected from these 36 papers was synthesised to identify and build a comprehensive description of the mechanisms of leadership of integrated teams and systems and their associated contexts and outcomes. Consultation with key stakeholders with a range of expertise throughout the process ensured that the review remained grounded in the reality of health and social care delivery and addressed practice and policy challenges.\n \n \n \n Evidence was identified for seven potentially important components of leadership in integrated care teams and systems. These were ‘inspiring intent to work together’, ‘creating the conditions to work together’, ‘balancing multiple perspectives’, ‘working with power’, ‘taking a wider view’, ‘a commitment to learning and development’ and ‘clarifying complexity’. No empirical evidence was found for an eighth mechanism, ‘fostering resilience’, although stakeholders felt that this was potentially an important, long-term component of leadership. A key message of the review was that empirical research often focused on the importance of who the leader of an integrated team or service was (i.e. their personality traits and characteristics) rather than what they did (i.e. the specific role that they played in integrated working), although stakeholders considered that a focus on leader personality was not sufficient. Other key messages highlighted the way in which power and influence are used by integrated service leaders and identified the hierarchies between health and social care which complicate the leading of integrated teams and systems.\n \n \n \n Evidence specifically addressing leadership of integrated care teams and systems was limited and lacking in detail, which restricted the degree to which definitive conclusions could be drawn around what works, for whom and in what circumstances.\n \n \n \n Research into the leadership of integrated care teams and systems is limited and underdeveloped, with ideas often reverting to existing framings of leadership in which teams and organisations are less complex. In making explicit some of the assumptions about how leaders lead integrated care teams and systems this review has contributed significant new perspectives, offering fresh theoretical grounding that can be built on, developed and tested further.\n \n \n \n By making explicit some of the assumptions underlying the leadership of integrated care teams and systems, this review has generated new perspectives that can be built on, developed and tested further.\n \n \n \n This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018119291.\n \n \n \n This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.\n","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/wpng1013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

As the organisation of health and social care in England moves rapidly towards greater integration, the resulting systems and teams will require distinctive leadership. However, little is known about how the effective leadership of these teams and systems can be supported and improved. In particular, there is relatively little understanding of how effective leadership across integrated care teams and systems may be enacted, the contexts in which this might take place and the subsequent implications this has on integrated care. This realist review developed and refined programme theories of leadership of integrated health and social care teams and systems, exploring what works, for whom and in what circumstances. The review utilised a realist synthesis approach, informed by the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) publication standards, to explore existing literature on the leadership of integrated care teams and systems, complemented by ongoing stakeholder consultation. Empirical evidence specifically addressing leadership of integrated teams or services was limited, with only 36 papers included in the review. The evidence collected from these 36 papers was synthesised to identify and build a comprehensive description of the mechanisms of leadership of integrated teams and systems and their associated contexts and outcomes. Consultation with key stakeholders with a range of expertise throughout the process ensured that the review remained grounded in the reality of health and social care delivery and addressed practice and policy challenges. Evidence was identified for seven potentially important components of leadership in integrated care teams and systems. These were ‘inspiring intent to work together’, ‘creating the conditions to work together’, ‘balancing multiple perspectives’, ‘working with power’, ‘taking a wider view’, ‘a commitment to learning and development’ and ‘clarifying complexity’. No empirical evidence was found for an eighth mechanism, ‘fostering resilience’, although stakeholders felt that this was potentially an important, long-term component of leadership. A key message of the review was that empirical research often focused on the importance of who the leader of an integrated team or service was (i.e. their personality traits and characteristics) rather than what they did (i.e. the specific role that they played in integrated working), although stakeholders considered that a focus on leader personality was not sufficient. Other key messages highlighted the way in which power and influence are used by integrated service leaders and identified the hierarchies between health and social care which complicate the leading of integrated teams and systems. Evidence specifically addressing leadership of integrated care teams and systems was limited and lacking in detail, which restricted the degree to which definitive conclusions could be drawn around what works, for whom and in what circumstances. Research into the leadership of integrated care teams and systems is limited and underdeveloped, with ideas often reverting to existing framings of leadership in which teams and organisations are less complex. In making explicit some of the assumptions about how leaders lead integrated care teams and systems this review has contributed significant new perspectives, offering fresh theoretical grounding that can be built on, developed and tested further. By making explicit some of the assumptions underlying the leadership of integrated care teams and systems, this review has generated new perspectives that can be built on, developed and tested further. This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018119291. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
发展综合卫生和社会护理团队和系统的领导方案理论:现实主义综合
随着英格兰的卫生和社会护理组织迅速走向更大的一体化,由此产生的系统和团队将需要独特的领导。然而,人们对如何支持和改进这些团队和系统的有效领导知之甚少。特别是,人们对如何在综合护理团队和系统中实施有效的领导、可能发生这种情况的背景以及这对综合护理的后续影响知之甚少。这篇现实主义综述发展和完善了综合卫生和社会护理团队和系统的领导方案理论,探讨了什么有效,对谁有效,在什么情况下有效。该综述采用了现实主义和元叙事证据综合:进化标准(RAMESES)出版标准为依据的现实主义综合方法,探索了关于综合护理团队和系统领导的现有文献,并辅以正在进行的利益相关者咨询。专门涉及综合团队或服务领导能力的经验证据有限,审查中只包括36篇论文。从这36篇论文中收集的证据被综合起来,以确定并建立对综合团队和系统的领导机制及其相关背景和结果的全面描述。在整个过程中,与具有一系列专业知识的关键利益攸关方进行协商,确保审查始终以卫生和社会护理提供的现实为基础,并应对实践和政策挑战。在综合护理团队和系统中,发现了领导层的七个潜在重要组成部分的证据。这些是“鼓舞人心的合作意愿”、“创造合作条件”、“平衡多个视角”、“与权力合作”、“着眼于更广阔的视野”、“致力于学习和发展”以及“澄清复杂性”。没有发现第八种机制“培养韧性”的实证证据,尽管利益相关者认为这可能是领导力的一个重要的长期组成部分。审查的一个关键信息是,实证研究往往关注综合团队或服务的领导者是谁(即他们的个性特征和特征)的重要性,而不是他们做了什么(即他们在综合工作中发挥的具体作用),尽管利益相关者认为仅关注领导者个性是不够的。其他关键信息强调了综合服务领导者使用权力和影响力的方式,并确定了卫生和社会护理之间的等级制度,这使综合团队和系统的领导复杂化。专门涉及综合护理团队和系统领导力的证据有限且缺乏细节,这限制了围绕什么有效、对谁有效以及在什么情况下有效得出明确结论的程度。对综合护理团队和系统领导力的研究是有限的,而且还不成熟,人们的想法往往回到现有的领导力框架中,团队和组织不那么复杂。通过明确领导人如何领导综合护理团队和系统的一些假设,这篇综述提供了重要的新视角,提供了可以进一步建立、发展和测试的新理论基础。通过明确综合护理团队和系统领导层的一些假设,这项审查产生了可以进一步建立、发展和测试的新视角。本研究注册为PROSPERO CRD42018119291。该项目由国家卫生研究所(NIHR)卫生和社会护理提供研究计划资助,并将在《卫生和社会保健提供研究》上全文发表;第10卷第7期。有关更多项目信息,请访问NIHR期刊图书馆网站。
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
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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