How can healthcare organizations implement patient-centered care? Examining a large-scale cultural transformation.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organizations increasingly are focused on providing care which is patient-centered rather than disease-focused. Yet little is known about how best to transform the culture of care in these organizations. We sought to understand key organizational factors for implementing patient-centered care cultural transformation through an examination of efforts in the US Department of Veterans Affairs. METHODS: We conducted multi-day site visits at four US Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers designated as leaders in providing patient-centered care. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 108 employees (22 senior leaders, 42 middle managers, 37 front-line providers and 7 staff). Transcripts of audio recordings were analyzed using a priori codes based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We used constant comparison analysis to synthesize codes into meaningful domains. RESULTS: Sites described actions taken to foster patient-centered care in seven domains: 1) leadership; 2) patient and family engagement; 3) staff engagement; 4) focus on innovations; 5) alignment of staff roles and priorities; 6) organizational structures and processes; 7) environment of care. Within each domain, we identified multi-faceted strategies for implementing change. These included efforts by all levels of organizational leaders who modeled patient-centered care in their interactions and fostered willingness to try novel approaches to care amongst staff. Alignment and integration of patient centered care within the organization, particularly surrounding roles, priorities and bureaucratic rules, remained major challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Transforming healthcare systems to focus on patient-centered care and better serve the "whole" patient is a complex endeavor. Efforts to transform healthcare culture require robust, multi-pronged efforts at all levels of the organization; leadership is only the beginning. Challenges remain for incorporating patient-centered approaches in the context of competing priorities and regulations. Through actions within each of the domains, organizations may begin to truly transform to patient-driven care.

Identifying and overcoming implementation challenges: Experience of 59 noninstitutional long-term services and support pilot programs in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: From 2010 to 2013, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) funded a large pilot initiative to implement noninstitutional long-term services and supports (LTSS) programs to support aging Veterans. Our team evaluated implementation of 59 VA noninstitutional LTSS programs. PURPOSE: The specific objectives of this study are to (a) examine the challenges influencing program implementation comparing active sites that remained open and inactive sites that closed during the funding period and (b) identify ways that active sites overcame the challenges they experienced. METHODOLOGY: Key informant semistructured interviews occurred between 2011 and 2013. We conducted 217 telephone interviews over four time points. Content analysis was used to identify emergent themes. The study team met regularly to define each challenge, review all codes, and discuss discrepancies. For each follow-up interview with the sites, the list of established challenges was used as a priori themes. Emergent data were also coded. RESULTS: The challenges affecting implementation included human resources and staffing issues, infrastructure, resources allocation and geography, referrals and marketing, leadership support, and team dynamics and processes. Programs were able to overcome challenges by communicating with team members and other areas in the organization, utilizing information technology solutions, creative use of staff and flexible schedules, and obtaining additional resources. DISCUSSION: This study highlights several common challenges programs can address during the program implementation. The most often mentioned strategy was effective communication. Strategies also targeted several components of the organization including organizational functions and processes (e.g., importance of coordination within a team and across disciplines to provide good care), infrastructure (e.g., information technology and human resources), and program fit with priorities in the organization (e.g., leadership support). IMPLICATIONS: Anticipating potential pitfalls of program implementation for future noninstitutional LTSS programs can improve implementation efficiency and program sustainability. Staff at multiple levels in the organization must fully support noninstitutional LTSS programs to address these challenges.

Forming and activating an internal facilitation group for successful implementation: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: This study focuses on an implementation facilitation strategy to improve the delivery of anticoagulation care within pharmacy-run clinics across 8 Veterans Health Administration (VA) medical centers. Other studies have explored various models of implementation facilitation, including external facilitation (EF), internal facilitation (IF), and blended facilitation (BF) combining both approaches. This study focuses on the use of an internal facilitation team of anticoagulation coordinators representing 8 VA anticoagulation clinics to enhance the implementation process. This study examines how the team became instrumental in the successful implementation of evidence-based practice change. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted annually over 4 years with representatives from each site, the internal facilitators (site champions), at 8 VA hospitals (47 interviews). Additionally, five external facilitators, experts in quality improvement and anticoagulation care who guided the implementation, were interviewed. Analysis drew on a deductive approach based on the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) model and emergent thematic analysis to identify factors related to effectiveness of the internal facilitation team. RESULTS: Key findings are that the following factors enhanced successful uptake of the anticoagulation initiative: 1) Regular participation by the site champion in the internal facilitation team; 2) Champion strongly committed to being an agent of change; and 3) Champion received greater support from their supervisors. The first and second factors are interrelated, as internal facilitators who actively and regularly participated in the internal facilitation team often became truly committed to the improvement project. Both factors relate to the third, as supervisor support not only facilitated changes in practice, but also facilitated regular team attendance and stronger participation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study adds to implementation science by detailing how internal facilitators learn their skills over time, and how a group of internal facilitators can help each other succeed. These findings can guide those who wish to incorporate internal facilitation teams as an implementation strategy, and demonstrate how sites can build capacity for implementation efforts. SYNOPSIS: This study focuses on an implementation facilitation strategy to improve the delivery of anticoagulation care within pharmacy-run clinics across 8 Veterans Health Administration medical centers. Internal facilitators (IFs) guided by and supported by an external facilitators (EF), successfully implemented the clinical innovation. This study examines how the IF group became instrumental in the successful implementation of evidence-based practice change.

What roles do middle managers play in implementation of innovative practices?

BACKGROUND: Middle managers play key roles in hospitals as the bridge between senior leaders and frontline staff. Yet relatively little research has focused on their role in implementing new practices. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to expand the understanding of middle managers' influence in organizations by looking at their activities through the lens of two complementary conceptual frameworks. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We analyzed qualitative data from 17 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers with high and low potential to change organizational practices. We analyzed 98 interviews with staff ranging from senior leaders to frontline staff to identify themes within an a priori framework reflecting middle manager activities. FINDINGS: Analyses yielded 14 emergent themes that allowed us to classify specific expressions of middle manager commitment to implementation of innovative practices (e.g., facilitate improvement innovation, garner staff buy-in). In comparing middle manager behaviors in high and low change potential sites, we found that most emergent themes were present in both groups. However, the activities and interactions described differed between the groups. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Middle managers can use the promising strategies identified by our analyses to guide and improve their effectiveness in implementing new practices. These strategies can also inform senior leaders striving to guide middle managers in those efforts.

Contextual Facilitators of and Barriers to Nursing Home Pressure Ulcer Prevention.

PURPOSE: To present findings of a study of institutional factors related to pressure ulcer (PrU) prevention in Veterans Health Administration nursing homes. TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. OBJECTIVES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to:1. Identify the study's design, process, and purpose.2. List the factors pertaining to sites with improving performance. OBJECTIVES: Important gaps exist in the knowledge of how to achieve successful, sustained prevention of pressure ulcers (PrUs) in nursing homes. This study aimed to address those gaps by comparing nursing leadership and indirect care staff members' impressions about the context of PrU prevention in facilities with improving and declining PrU rates. SETTING: The study was conducted in a sample of 6 Veterans Health Administration nursing homes (known as community living centers) purposively selected to represent a range of PrU care performance. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: One-time 30-minute semistructured interviews with 23 community living center staff were conducted. Qualitative interview data were analyzed using an analytic framework containing (a) a priori analytic constructs based on the study's conceptual framework and (b) sections for emerging constructs. MAIN RESULTS: Analysis revealed 6 key concepts differentiating sites with improving and declining PrU care performance. These concepts were (1) structures through which the change effort is initiated; (2) organizational prioritization, alignment, and support; (3) improvement culture; (4) clarity of roles and responsibilities; (5) communication strategies; and (6) staffing and clinical practices. Results also pointed to potential contextual facilitators of and barriers to successful PrU prevention. CONCLUSIONS: Leadership's visible prioritization of and support for PrU prevention and the initiation of PrU prevention activities through formal structures were the most striking components represented at sites with improving performance, but not at ones where performance declined. Sites with improving performance were more likely to align frontline staff and leadership goals for PrU prevention.

Making housing first happen: organizational leadership in VA's expansion of permanent supportive housing.

BACKGROUND: While most organizational literature has focused on initiatives that transpire inside the hospital walls, the redesign of American health care increasingly asks that health care institutions address matters outside their walls, targeting the health of populations. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)'s national effort to end Veteran homelessness represents an externally focused organizational endeavor. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the role of organizational practices in the implementation of Housing First (HF), an evidence-based homeless intervention for chronically homeless individuals. DESIGN: This was an interview-based comparative case study conducted across eight VA Medical Centers (VAMCs). PARTICIPANTS: Front line staff, mid-level managers, and senior leaders at VA Medical Centers were interviewed between February and December 2012. APPROACH: Using a structured narrative and numeric scoring, we assessed the correlation between successful HF implementation and organizational practices devised according to the organizational transformation model (OTM). KEY RESULTS: Scoring results suggested a strong association between HF implementation and OTM practice. Strong impetus to house Veterans came from national leadership, reinforced by Medical Center directors closely tracking results. More effective Medical Center leaders differentiated themselves by joining front-line staff in the work (at public events and in process improvement exercises), by elevating homeless-knowledgeable persons into senior leadership, and by exerting themselves to resolve logistic challenges. Vertical alignment and horizontal integration advanced at sites that fostered work groups cutting across service lines and hierarchical levels. By contrast, weak alignment from top to bottom typically also hindered cooperation across departments. Staff commitment to ending homelessness was high, though sustainability planning was limited in this baseline year of observation. CONCLUSION: Key organizational practices correlated with more successful implementation of HF for homeless Veterans. Medical Center directors substantively influenced the success of this endeavor through their actions to foster impetus, demonstrate commitment and support alignment and integration.

VA's expansion of supportive housing: successes and challenges on the path toward Housing First.

OBJECTIVES: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is transitioning to a Housing First approach to placement of veterans in permanent supportive housing through the use of rental vouchers, an ambitious organizational transformation. This qualitative study examined the experiences of eight VA facilities undertaking this endeavor in 2012. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team interviewed facility leadership, midlevel managers, and frontline staff (N=95 individuals) at eight VA facilities representing four U.S. regions. The team used a semistructured interview protocol and the constant comparative method to explore how individuals throughout the organizations experienced and responded to the challenges of transitioning to a Housing First approach. RESULTS: Frontline staff faced challenges in rapidly housing homeless veterans because of difficult rental markets, the need to coordinate with local public housing authorities, and a lack of available funds for move-in costs. Staff sought to balance their time spent on housing activities with intensive case management of highly vulnerable veterans. Finding low-demand sheltering options (that is, no expectations regarding sobriety or treatment participation, as in the Housing First model) for veterans waiting for housing presented a significant challenge to implementation of Housing First. Facility leadership supported Housing First implementation through resource allocation, performance monitoring, and reliance on midlevel managers to understand and meet the challenges of implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the considerable practical challenges and innovative solutions arising from a large-scale effort to implement Housing First, with particular attention to the experiences of individuals at all levels within an organization.

Team effectiveness and organizational context in the implementation of a clinical innovation.

OBJECTIVES: The study examined the relationship between care delivery team effectiveness, management support, organizational culture, and the extent of implementation of a clinical innovation. METHODS: The study involved 6 target clinic areas in 78 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers that participated in the national implementation of Advanced Clinic Access (ACA). Primary data were collected through staff surveys and structured interviews; secondary analyses were conducted using administrative databases. Hierarchical linear models were used to test the influence of team effectiveness and organizational context on implementation ratings. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Team effectiveness as measured by team knowledge and skills was significantly associated with the extent of ACA implementation in both primary and specialty care. Team functioning was significant only in primary care. Management support as measured by personal leadership support for quality improvement and the importance of reduced wait times was also significantly associated with ACA implementation, but practical management support and organizational culture were not. Team effectiveness partially mediated the relationship between extent of implementation and personal leadership support. Findings support the underlying theory that implementation of clinical innovations depends on both individual staff and a more complex dynamic of individuals operating within work units in the larger organization.

Implementation of a clinical innovation: the case of advanced clinic access in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Healthcare organizations seeking to improve clinical practices often have disappointing results because the planned innovations are not successfully implemented. To increase the understanding of implementation, we analyzed the national spread of an ambulatory innovation in the Department of Veterans Affairs. This study provides support for a conceptual model that posits that the extent to which a clinical innovation is implemented will be affected by factors in 3 domains: (1) intentional activities to introduce, spread, and support the innovation; (2) the attitudes and capabilities of clinic staff responsible for implementing the innovation; and (3) the context of the facility in which the innovation is being introduced. Among the strongest predictors of successful implementation, management support for the innovation and clinic team knowledge and skills to make changes successfully were significant across both primary care and specialty clinics.

Transformational change in health care systems: an organizational model.

BACKGROUND: The Institute of Medicine's 2001 report Crossing the Quality Chasm argued for fundamental redesign of the U.S. health care system. Six years later, many health care organizations have embraced the report's goals, but few have succeeded in making the substantial transformations needed to achieve those aims. PURPOSES: This article offers a model for moving organizations from short-term, isolated performance improvements to sustained, reliable, organization-wide, and evidence-based improvements in patient care. METHODOLOGY: Longitudinal comparative case studies were conducted in 12 health care systems using a mixed-methods evaluation design based on semistructured interviews and document review. Participating health care systems included seven systems funded through the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Pursuing Perfection Program and five systems with long-standing commitments to improvement and high-quality care. FINDINGS: Five interactive elements appear critical to successful transformation of patient care: (1) Impetus to transform; (2) Leadership commitment to quality; (3) Improvement initiatives that actively engage staff in meaningful problem solving; (4) Alignment to achieve consistency of organization goals with resource allocation and actions at all levels of the organization; and (5) Integration to bridge traditional intra-organizational boundaries among individual components. These elements drive change by affecting the components of the complex health care organization in which they operate: (1) Mission, vision, and strategies that set its direction and priorities; (2) Culture that reflects its informal values and norms; (3) Operational functions and processes that embody the work done in patient care; and (4) Infrastructure such as information technology and human resources that support the delivery of patient care. Transformation occurs over time with iterative changes being sustained and spread across the organization. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The conceptual model holds promise for guiding health care organizations in their efforts to pursue the Institute of Medicine aims of fundamental system redesign to achieve dramatically improved patient care.

Monitoring the progress of system integration.

As providers of health care face the multiple challenges of today's health care environment, many believe that integrated delivery systems promise the structure needed to provide high-quality, cost-efficient care. They make structural and process changes with the expectation that those changes will improve system performance. But few systems actually measure progress in creating an integrated system. This article describes one health care system's strategy for introducing organizational measures to create an integrated system scorecard and focuses on the development, results, and use of the staff survey. The survey provides reliable indicators of system integration. Linking the survey results with network performance measures, in turn, provides managers with tools for judging whether system integration is associated with improved system performance.