关系协调和以团队为基础的护理:改变学习型卫生系统中的主动性超载和其他挑战

IF 2.6 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Lauren Hajjar, Olawale Olaleye, Julius Yang, Susan McGirr, Erin E. Sullivan
{"title":"关系协调和以团队为基础的护理:改变学习型卫生系统中的主动性超载和其他挑战","authors":"Lauren Hajjar,&nbsp;Olawale Olaleye,&nbsp;Julius Yang,&nbsp;Susan McGirr,&nbsp;Erin E. Sullivan","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.10455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Most change interventions to address quality of care and lower costs focus on technical aspects of the work through process improvements, which have not consistently delivered the anticipated impact for healthcare organizations. This study aims to (1) understand how relational interventions including shared huddles and cross-role shadowing opportunities, impact team dynamics and functioning and (2) describe the challenges and opportunities associated with implementing relational interventions at an Academic Medical Center in a large metropolitan city in the United States.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This paper is a mixed method, pre–post-intervention study in which data were collected using a validated survey, observations, interviews, and one focus group. Relational coordination survey data were analyzed within and across eight interdependent workgroups on three inpatient medical units at baseline and 16 months post-intervention. Qualitative data were coded and analyzed for themes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>While there were some improvements in overall relational coordination between baseline and post-intervention measures, the findings were not statistically significant. Qualitative data reveal four themes, highlighting the strengths and barriers to the intervention: (1) incomplete fidelity to the relational coordination framework, (2) leadership, (3) meeting structure and participation, and (4) stakeholder engagement.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Within the healthcare context, this study contributes to our learning about implementing and measuring relational interventions. We offer insights for future research and practice on change initiative overload and operational constraints, socializing relational interventions, and balancing core and non-core roles in the intervention strategy.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"9 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.10455","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relational coordination and team-based care: Change initiative overload and other challenges in a learning health system\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Hajjar,&nbsp;Olawale Olaleye,&nbsp;Julius Yang,&nbsp;Susan McGirr,&nbsp;Erin E. Sullivan\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/lrh2.10455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>Most change interventions to address quality of care and lower costs focus on technical aspects of the work through process improvements, which have not consistently delivered the anticipated impact for healthcare organizations. This study aims to (1) understand how relational interventions including shared huddles and cross-role shadowing opportunities, impact team dynamics and functioning and (2) describe the challenges and opportunities associated with implementing relational interventions at an Academic Medical Center in a large metropolitan city in the United States.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This paper is a mixed method, pre–post-intervention study in which data were collected using a validated survey, observations, interviews, and one focus group. Relational coordination survey data were analyzed within and across eight interdependent workgroups on three inpatient medical units at baseline and 16 months post-intervention. Qualitative data were coded and analyzed for themes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>While there were some improvements in overall relational coordination between baseline and post-intervention measures, the findings were not statistically significant. Qualitative data reveal four themes, highlighting the strengths and barriers to the intervention: (1) incomplete fidelity to the relational coordination framework, (2) leadership, (3) meeting structure and participation, and (4) stakeholder engagement.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Within the healthcare context, this study contributes to our learning about implementing and measuring relational interventions. We offer insights for future research and practice on change initiative overload and operational constraints, socializing relational interventions, and balancing core and non-core roles in the intervention strategy.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43916,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning Health Systems\",\"volume\":\"9 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lrh2.10455\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning Health Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lrh2.10455\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lrh2.10455","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数旨在解决护理质量和降低成本的干预措施都侧重于通过流程改进工作的技术方面,这并没有始终如一地为医疗保健组织带来预期的影响。本研究旨在(1)了解包括共享会议和跨角色影子机会在内的关系干预如何影响团队动态和功能;(2)描述在美国一个大城市的学术医疗中心实施关系干预的挑战和机遇。方法采用干预前、干预后的混合研究方法,通过有效的调查、观察、访谈和一个焦点小组收集数据。在基线和干预后16个月,对三个住院医疗单位的八个相互依存工作组内部和跨工作组的关系协调调查数据进行了分析。对定性数据进行编码和主题分析。结果虽然基线和干预后测量之间的总体关系协调有所改善,但研究结果没有统计学意义。定性数据揭示了四个主题,突出了干预的优势和障碍:(1)对关系协调框架的不完全忠诚,(2)领导,(3)会议结构和参与,以及(4)利益相关者参与。结论:在医疗保健背景下,本研究有助于我们了解相关干预措施的实施和测量。我们为未来的研究和实践提供了关于变革主动性超载和操作约束,社会化关系干预以及平衡干预策略中的核心和非核心角色的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Relational coordination and team-based care: Change initiative overload and other challenges in a learning health system

Relational coordination and team-based care: Change initiative overload and other challenges in a learning health system

Introduction

Most change interventions to address quality of care and lower costs focus on technical aspects of the work through process improvements, which have not consistently delivered the anticipated impact for healthcare organizations. This study aims to (1) understand how relational interventions including shared huddles and cross-role shadowing opportunities, impact team dynamics and functioning and (2) describe the challenges and opportunities associated with implementing relational interventions at an Academic Medical Center in a large metropolitan city in the United States.

Methods

This paper is a mixed method, pre–post-intervention study in which data were collected using a validated survey, observations, interviews, and one focus group. Relational coordination survey data were analyzed within and across eight interdependent workgroups on three inpatient medical units at baseline and 16 months post-intervention. Qualitative data were coded and analyzed for themes.

Results

While there were some improvements in overall relational coordination between baseline and post-intervention measures, the findings were not statistically significant. Qualitative data reveal four themes, highlighting the strengths and barriers to the intervention: (1) incomplete fidelity to the relational coordination framework, (2) leadership, (3) meeting structure and participation, and (4) stakeholder engagement.

Conclusions

Within the healthcare context, this study contributes to our learning about implementing and measuring relational interventions. We offer insights for future research and practice on change initiative overload and operational constraints, socializing relational interventions, and balancing core and non-core roles in the intervention strategy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Learning Health Systems
Learning Health Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
22.60%
发文量
55
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信