基于社区的多学科团队在两个综合护理和支持先锋中的作用和功能:来自地方系统领导者的观点。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Agata Pacho, Gerald Wistow, Nicholas Mays, Lavanya Thana, Lucia Rehackova, Nick Douglas, Mustafa Al-Haboubi, Mary Alison Durand
{"title":"基于社区的多学科团队在两个综合护理和支持先锋中的作用和功能:来自地方系统领导者的观点。","authors":"Agata Pacho, Gerald Wistow, Nicholas Mays, Lavanya Thana, Lucia Rehackova, Nick Douglas, Mustafa Al-Haboubi, Mary Alison Durand","doi":"10.1177/13558196251349353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectivesCentral government has been promoting closer integration between the National Health Service (NHS) and local government social services in England for more than five decades. Improved coordination between primary, hospital, community health and social services has been advocated as a cost-effective response to growing care needs in an ageing population. This paper concentrates on one of the principal local care coordination mechanisms: community-based multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) involving NHS and social services staff. It reports local leaders' perceptions of MDTs' current and future contributions to more coordinated care and support systems in two integrated care Pioneer sites.MethodsThirty-two qualitative semi-structured interviews with 25 local system leaders and operational managers in two contrasting Integrated Care and Support Pioneer areas were conducted between October 2018 and April 2021, as part of a wider evaluation of the Integrated Care and Support Pioneer Programme. Eight of those interviews took place after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and between lockdowns. Interviews were analysed thematically.ResultsLocal leaders in both areas broadly shared a vision of integrated care in which MDTs were essential mechanisms for coordinating improvements in health and wellbeing, especially for older people who are frail, experience falls and have long-term health conditions. Organisational differences between and within sites influenced local decisions about the purpose and structure of MDTs, but, despite such variations, interviewees identified similar challenges to implementation. Staff turnover, often linked to funding uncertainties, and the lack of shared information systems, were among the most frequent operational challenges noted. System leaders valued national policy frameworks as potential enablers of integrated care but also recognised the role of local contexts in shaping local implementation decisions. Interviewees highlighted benefits emerging from multidisciplinary working, including its potential to deliver more holistic care, fewer instances of work duplication, speedier access to care and enhanced home care provision. However, they were concerned such benefits were not always captured by commonly used performance indicators and thus the value of MDTs could be under-estimated.ConclusionsLocal contextual variables and local understandings of these variables appeared to be the main influences on variations in local responses to national expectations of improvements in care integration. Local leaders in both areas broadly shared a vision of integrated care in which MDTs provided essential mechanisms for securing interdependent improvements in both the health and wellbeing of local populations and improvements in workforce job satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":"30 1_suppl","pages":"25S-35S"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12423465/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role and functions of community-based multidisciplinary teams in two integrated care and support Pioneers: Perspectives from local system leaders.\",\"authors\":\"Agata Pacho, Gerald Wistow, Nicholas Mays, Lavanya Thana, Lucia Rehackova, Nick Douglas, Mustafa Al-Haboubi, Mary Alison Durand\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13558196251349353\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectivesCentral government has been promoting closer integration between the National Health Service (NHS) and local government social services in England for more than five decades. Improved coordination between primary, hospital, community health and social services has been advocated as a cost-effective response to growing care needs in an ageing population. This paper concentrates on one of the principal local care coordination mechanisms: community-based multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) involving NHS and social services staff. It reports local leaders' perceptions of MDTs' current and future contributions to more coordinated care and support systems in two integrated care Pioneer sites.MethodsThirty-two qualitative semi-structured interviews with 25 local system leaders and operational managers in two contrasting Integrated Care and Support Pioneer areas were conducted between October 2018 and April 2021, as part of a wider evaluation of the Integrated Care and Support Pioneer Programme. Eight of those interviews took place after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and between lockdowns. Interviews were analysed thematically.ResultsLocal leaders in both areas broadly shared a vision of integrated care in which MDTs were essential mechanisms for coordinating improvements in health and wellbeing, especially for older people who are frail, experience falls and have long-term health conditions. Organisational differences between and within sites influenced local decisions about the purpose and structure of MDTs, but, despite such variations, interviewees identified similar challenges to implementation. Staff turnover, often linked to funding uncertainties, and the lack of shared information systems, were among the most frequent operational challenges noted. System leaders valued national policy frameworks as potential enablers of integrated care but also recognised the role of local contexts in shaping local implementation decisions. Interviewees highlighted benefits emerging from multidisciplinary working, including its potential to deliver more holistic care, fewer instances of work duplication, speedier access to care and enhanced home care provision. However, they were concerned such benefits were not always captured by commonly used performance indicators and thus the value of MDTs could be under-estimated.ConclusionsLocal contextual variables and local understandings of these variables appeared to be the main influences on variations in local responses to national expectations of improvements in care integration. Local leaders in both areas broadly shared a vision of integrated care in which MDTs provided essential mechanisms for securing interdependent improvements in both the health and wellbeing of local populations and improvements in workforce job satisfaction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy\",\"volume\":\"30 1_suppl\",\"pages\":\"25S-35S\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12423465/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196251349353\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196251349353","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

50多年来,中央政府一直在推动英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)和地方政府社会服务之间的紧密整合。改善初级保健、医院、社区保健和社会服务之间的协调,被认为是对老龄化人口日益增长的护理需求作出的具有成本效益的反应。本文集中在一个主要的地方护理协调机制:以社区为基础的多学科团队(MDTs)涉及NHS和社会服务人员。它报告了当地领导人对mdt目前和未来在两个综合护理先锋站点对更加协调的护理和支持系统的贡献的看法。方法在2018年10月至2021年4月期间,作为对综合护理和支持先锋计划更广泛评估的一部分,对25名当地系统领导者和运营经理进行了32次定性半结构化访谈。其中8次采访是在COVID-19大流行开始后和封锁期间进行的。访谈按主题进行分析。结果这两个地区的地方领导人广泛地分享了综合护理的愿景,其中mdt是协调改善健康和福祉的重要机制,特别是对体弱多病、经常跌倒和有长期健康问题的老年人。地点之间和地点内部的组织差异影响了当地关于mdt的目的和结构的决定,但是,尽管存在这些差异,受访者确定了执行方面的类似挑战。工作人员更替往往与资金不确定和缺乏共享的信息系统有关,这是指出的最常见的业务挑战。系统领导人重视国家政策框架作为综合护理的潜在推动因素,但也认识到地方情况在形成地方实施决策方面的作用。受访者强调了多学科工作带来的好处,包括它有可能提供更全面的护理,减少工作重复,更快获得护理和加强家庭护理提供。但是,他们担心,通常使用的业绩指标并不总能反映这种效益,因此可能低估了多边发展指标的价值。结论当地环境变量和当地对这些变量的理解似乎是影响当地对改善护理整合的国家期望的反应差异的主要因素。这两个领域的地方领导人广泛地分享了综合护理的愿景,其中mdt提供了确保相互依存地改善当地人口的健康和福祉以及改善劳动力工作满意度的基本机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The role and functions of community-based multidisciplinary teams in two integrated care and support Pioneers: Perspectives from local system leaders.

The role and functions of community-based multidisciplinary teams in two integrated care and support Pioneers: Perspectives from local system leaders.

ObjectivesCentral government has been promoting closer integration between the National Health Service (NHS) and local government social services in England for more than five decades. Improved coordination between primary, hospital, community health and social services has been advocated as a cost-effective response to growing care needs in an ageing population. This paper concentrates on one of the principal local care coordination mechanisms: community-based multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) involving NHS and social services staff. It reports local leaders' perceptions of MDTs' current and future contributions to more coordinated care and support systems in two integrated care Pioneer sites.MethodsThirty-two qualitative semi-structured interviews with 25 local system leaders and operational managers in two contrasting Integrated Care and Support Pioneer areas were conducted between October 2018 and April 2021, as part of a wider evaluation of the Integrated Care and Support Pioneer Programme. Eight of those interviews took place after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and between lockdowns. Interviews were analysed thematically.ResultsLocal leaders in both areas broadly shared a vision of integrated care in which MDTs were essential mechanisms for coordinating improvements in health and wellbeing, especially for older people who are frail, experience falls and have long-term health conditions. Organisational differences between and within sites influenced local decisions about the purpose and structure of MDTs, but, despite such variations, interviewees identified similar challenges to implementation. Staff turnover, often linked to funding uncertainties, and the lack of shared information systems, were among the most frequent operational challenges noted. System leaders valued national policy frameworks as potential enablers of integrated care but also recognised the role of local contexts in shaping local implementation decisions. Interviewees highlighted benefits emerging from multidisciplinary working, including its potential to deliver more holistic care, fewer instances of work duplication, speedier access to care and enhanced home care provision. However, they were concerned such benefits were not always captured by commonly used performance indicators and thus the value of MDTs could be under-estimated.ConclusionsLocal contextual variables and local understandings of these variables appeared to be the main influences on variations in local responses to national expectations of improvements in care integration. Local leaders in both areas broadly shared a vision of integrated care in which MDTs provided essential mechanisms for securing interdependent improvements in both the health and wellbeing of local populations and improvements in workforce job satisfaction.

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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
×
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