RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Despite three decades of policy initiatives to improve integration of health care, delivery of health care in New Zealand remains fragmented, and health inequities persist for Maori and other high priority populations. An evidence base is needed to increase the chances of success with implementation of large-system transformation (LST) initiatives in a complex adaptive system. METHODS: This research aimed to identify key elements that support implementation of LST initiatives, and to investigate contextual factors that influence these initiatives. The realist logic of enquiry, nested within the macro framing of complex adaptive systems, formed the overall methodology for this research and involved five phases: theory gleaning from a local LST initiative, literature review, interviews, workshop, and online survey. NVivo software programme was used for thematic analysis of the interview, workshop, and the survey data. We identified key elements and explained variations in success (outcomes) by identifying mechanisms triggered by various contexts in which LST initiatives are implemented. RESULTS: The research found that a set of 10 key elements need to be present in the New Zealand health system to increase chances of success with implementation of LST initiatives. These are: (i) an alliancing way of working; (ii) a commitment to te Tiriti o Waitangi; (iii) an understanding of equity; (iv) clinical leadership and involvement; (v) involved people, whanau, and community; (vi) intelligent commissioning; (vii) continuous improvement; (viii) integrated health information; (ix) analytic capability; and (x) dedicated resources and time. The research identified five contextual factors that influenced implementation of LST initiatives: a history of working together, distributed leadership from funders, the maturity of Alliances, capacity and capability for improvement, and a continuous improvement culture. The research found that the key mechanism of trust is built and nurtured over time through sharing of power by senior health leaders by practising distributed leadership, which then creates a positive history of working together and increases the maturity of Alliances. DISCUSSION: Two authors (KMS and PBJ) led the development and implementation of the local LST initiative. This prior knowledge and experience provided a unique perspective to the research but also created a conflict of interest and introduced potential bias, these were managed through a wide range of data collection methods and informed consent from participants. The evidence-base for successful implementation of LST initiatives produced in this research contains knowledge and experience of senior system leaders who are often in charge of leading these initiatives. This evidence base enables decision makers to make sense of complex processes involved in the successful implementation of LST initiatives. CONCLUSIONS: Use of informal trust-based networks provided a critical platform for successful implementation of LST initiatives in the New Zealand health system. Maturity of these networks relies on building and sustaining high-trust relationships among the network members. The role of local and central agencies and the government is to provide the policy settings and conditions in which trust-based networks can flourish. OTHER: This study was approved by the Victoria University of Wellington Human Ethics Committee (Ethics Approval Number 27,356). The research was supported by the Victoria University of Wellington research grant (222,809) and from the University of Auckland Department of Medicine research fund (H10779).
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde , Programas Governamentais , Humanos , Governo , Nova Zelândia , Atenção à Saúde/organização & administraçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: A maturity matrix can be a useful tool for organisations implementing large-system transformation (LST) initiatives in complex systems. Insights from implementation of a local LST initiative using collaborative networks, known as Alliances, highlighted a tool was needed to help health system leaders prompt discussions on how and where to focus their change efforts. In the New Zealand (NZ) health system, Alliances were introduced to integrate the planning and delivery of health care between primary and hospital care. METHODS: The aim of this research was to use insights from Alliance members to develop a learning tool that collaborative networks could use to assess and improve their readiness for change. We constructed a maturity matrix using the knowledge of senior NZ health system leaders, in a workshop setting. The maturity matrix was empirically tested and refined with three Alliances and with feedback from the NZ Ministry of Health Maori Health Strategy and Policy team. RESULTS: The maturity matrix described the 10 key elements that had been found to support successful implementation of LST initiatives in the NZ health system, along with success indicators and different stages of maturity from beginning to excellence. Testing of the maturity matrix with three Alliances suggested that it functioned as a learning tool and stimulated collective thinking and reflection. The Maori Health Strategy and Policy team commented on the importance of such a tool to increase health system leaders' responsiveness to improving Maori health outcomes. Comparisons with similar international matrices revealed common elements with ours. A strength of our maturity matrix is that it is specific to the NZ context and is the first practical tool to implement large-scale change in the health system that incorporates principles of the Government's treaty with Maori, the indigenous people of NZ. CONCLUSIONS: Through a regular self-assessment process, use of the maturity matrix may create feedback loops to support deliberate learning and knowledge sharing for senior health system leaders and collaborative networks. The maturity matrix fills an important gap in the NZ health system and contributes to implementation science literature internationally. OTHER: This study was approved by the Victoria University of Wellington Human Ethics Committee (Ethics Approval Number 27,356). The research was supported by the Victoria University of Wellington research grant (222,809) and from the University of Auckland Department of Medicine research fund (H10779).