Observations of community-based multidisciplinary team meetings in health and social care for older people with long term conditions in England.

BACKGROUND: Community-based multi-disciplinary teams (MDTs) are the most common means to encourage health and social care service integration in England yet are rarely studied or directly observed. This paper reports on two rounds of non-participant observations of community-based multi-disciplinary team (MDT) meetings in two localities, as part of an evaluation of the Integrated Care and Support Pioneers Programme. We sought to understand how MDT meetings coordinate care and identify their 'added value' over bilateral discussions. METHODS: Two rounds of structured non-participant observations of 11 MDTs (28 meetings) in an inner city and mixed urban-rural area in England (June 2019-February 2020), using a group analysis approach. RESULTS: Despite diverse settings, attendance and caseloads, MDTs adopted similar processes of case management: presentation; information seeking/sharing; narrative construction; solution seeking; decision-making and task allocation. Patient-centredness was evident but scope to strengthen 'patient-voice' exists. MDTs were hampered by information governance rules and lack of interoperability between patient databases. Meetings were characterised by mutual respect and collegiality with little challenge. Decision-making appeared non-hierarchical, often involving dyads or triads of professionals. 'Added value' lay in: rapid patient information sharing; better understanding of contributing agencies' services; planning strategies for patients that providers had struggled to find the right way to engage satisfactorily; and managing risk and providing mutual support in stressful cases. CONCLUSIONS: More attention needs to be given to removing barriers to information sharing, creating scope for constructive challenge between staff and deciding when to remove cases from the caseload.

COVID-19: Implications for the Support of People with Social Care Needs in England.

This perspective examines the challenge posed by COVID-19 for social care services in England and describes responses to this challenge. People with social care needs experience increased risks of death and deteriorating physical and mental health with COVID-19. Social isolation introduced to reduce COVID-19 transmission may adversely affect well-being. While the need for social care rises, the ability of families and social care staff to provide support is reduced by illness and quarantine, implying reductions in staffing levels. Consequently, COVID-19 could seriously threaten care availability and quality. The government has sought volunteers to work in health and social care to help address the threat posed by staff shortages at a time of rising need, and the call has achieved an excellent response. The government has also removed some barriers to effective coordination between health and social care, while introducing measures to promote the financial viability of care providers. The pandemic presents unprecedented challenges that require well-co-coordinated responses across central and local government, health services, and non-government sectors.

Evaluating the design and implementation of the whole systems integrated care programme in North West London: why commissioning proved (again) to be the weakest link.

BACKGROUND: Commissioning is a term used in the English National Health Service (NHS) to refer to what most health systems call health planning or strategic purchasing. Drawing on research from a recent in-depth mixed methods study of a major integrated care initiative in North West London, we examine the role of commissioning in attempts to secure large-scale change within and between health and social care services to support the delivery of integrated care for people living with complex long-term conditions. METHODS: We analysed data collected in semi-structured interviews, surveys, workshops and non-participant observations using a thematic framework derived both deductively from the literature on commissioning and integrated care, as well as inductively from our coding and analysis of interview data. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that commissioning has significant limitations in enabling large-scale change in health services, particularly in engaging providers, supporting implementation, and attending to both its transactional and relational dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the consequences of giving insufficient attention to implementation, and especially the need for commissioners to enable, support and performance manage the delivery of procured services, while working closely with providers at all times. We propose a revised version of Øvretveit's cycle of commissioning that gives greater emphasis to embedding effective implementation processes within models of commissioning large-scale change.

Circles of Support and personalization: Exploring the economic case.

Circles of Support aim to enable people with learning disabilities (and others) to live full lives as part of their communities. As part of a wider study of the economic case for community capacity building conducted from 2012 to 2014, we conducted a mixed methods study of five Circles in North West England. Members of these Circles were supporting adults with moderate to profound learning disabilities and provided accounts of success in enabling the core member to live more independent lives with improved social care outcomes within cost envelopes that appeared to be less than more traditional types of support. The Circles also reported success in harnessing community resources to promote social inclusion and improve well-being. This very small-scale study can only offer tentative evidence but does appear to justify more rigorous research into the potential of Circles to secure cost-effective means of providing support to people with learning disabilities than the alternative, which in most cases would have been a long-term residential care placement.

Integration: work still in progress.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to set the context for this special issue and provide an introduction to the individual contributions. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This paper uses a literature survey and analysis. FINDINGS: Integration remains both a central goal and a field of limited but possibly developing achievement. Multiple meanings and usages are themselves sources of confusion and contestability that contribute to poor performance, as does an emphasis on process over outcome. This special issue provides an opportunity for the limitations and possibilities of integration to be explored from a wide range of disciplinary perspectives and international settings. Individual papers draw on a wide and innovatory range of theoretical approaches in addressing reasons for limited progress and opportunities for taking it further. Nonetheless, how far we have a good fit between this area of study and the tools we use for its evaluation remains an issue for concern and further exploration. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This editorial is not a systematic review, though it draws on findings from a number of such reviews. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The various contributions all have practical implications for the strategies to develop integration and its evaluation. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The special issue as a whole was designed to encourage fresh perspectives and approaches to be brought to bear on understanding, conducting and evaluating integration. This editorial introduces each of these themes.

The sociocultural framing of public attitudes to sharing the costs of social care for older people in England.

Twelve synchronous online focus groups were conducted, each involving four to six members of the general public who had expressed in-principle support for sharing the costs of social care for older people between service users and government. These explored participants' reasons for preferring a shared approach and their views on how costs should be shared, with particular attention given to the sociocultural frames employed. Four main sociocultural frames were identified, reflecting dominant discourses concerning (i) the financial burden of meeting social care need ('scarcity' frame) (ii) the core purpose of social care ('medicalised conception of care' frame) (iii) the role and perceived limitations of the private market ('consumer' frame), and (iv) fundamental concerns about safety, security and belonging ('loss and abandonment' frame). Of these four frames, the 'scarcity' frame was dominant, with views about how costs should be shared overwhelmingly formulated upon assumptions of insufficient resources. This was reflected in concerns about affordability and the consequent need for the financial burden to be shared between individuals and government, and resulted in a residual vision for care and anxieties about care quality, cliff-edge costs and abandonment. The concept of shared funding was also employed rhetorically to suggest an equitable approach to managing financial burden, reflected in phrases such as 'splitting the difference'. Whilst out-of-pocket payments were sometimes seen as useful or necessary in the context of scarce public resources, the idea of shared funding was sometimes interpreted more flexibly to include individual contributions made in a range of ways, including tax, social insurance payments and wider social and economic contributions to society. Despite the dominance of the 'scarcity' frame, participants favoured greater government contribution than currently. These four frames and their associated discourses provide insight into how the public 'hear' and make sense of the debate about social care funding and, specifically, how apparent support for shared public-private funding is structured. Government and those hoping to influence the future of social care funding need to promote a vision of funding reform and win support for it by actively engaging with the sociocultural frames that the public recognise and engage with, with all of their apparent inconsistencies and contradictions.

Public preferences for paying for social care in later life in England: A latent class analysis.

There is ongoing debate about how the funding system for social care of older people in England should best be reformed. We investigated how public attitudes to individual and state responsibility for paying for social care in later life vary with demographic and socio-economic characteristics. Four vignettes of individuals in need of home care or residential care with varying levels of savings, income and housing wealth were presented to a sample of people aged 18-75 years (n = 3000) in December 2018. Respondents were asked if care costs should be paid by the user, the state or shared. They were also asked about the best way to pay for social care in old age. Latent class analysis was used to identify sub-groups with similar preferences for paying for care, and to explore their socio-demographic characteristics. We identified five classes. The majority (Class 1, 58%) preferred that the state and the user should share social care costs. Class 2 (18%) thought that the state should pay all costs regardless of users' savings, income or housing wealth. Class 3 (15%) preferred users to pay all costs at all levels of savings, income and housing wealth, with the exception of those unable to afford the costs. Classes 4 and 5 (5% each) were characterised by different patterns of 'don't know' answers. Socio-economic status was higher among those proposing higher user contributions (Class 3) and lower among those with several 'don't' know' responses (Classes 4 and 5). Concerns about care costs in old age were high among those proposing that the state pays all costs (Class 2) and those preferring that users pay all costs (Class 3). This study shows that public views on social care funding vary with respondents' characteristics and that proposals to reform the system need to be carefully calibrated.

Improving Person-Centredness in Integrated Care for Older People: Experiences from Thirteen Integrated Care Sites in Europe.

INTRODUCTION: Although person-centredness is a key principle of integrated care, successfully embedding and improving person-centred care for older people remains a challenge. In the context of a cross-European project on integrated care for older people living at home, the objective of this paper is to provide insight at an overarching level, into activities aimed at improving person-centredness within the participating integrated care sites. The paper describes experiences with these activities from the service providers' and service users' perspectives. METHODS: A multiple embedded case study design was conducted that included thirteen integrated care sites for older people living at home. RESULTS: Service providers were positive about the activities that aimed to promote person-centred care and thought that most activities (e.g. comprehensive needs assessment) positively influenced person-centredness. Experiences of service users were mixed. For some activities (e.g. enablement services), discrepancies were identified between the views of service providers and those of service users. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Evaluating activities aimed at promoting person-centredness from both the service providers' and service users' perspectives showed that not all efforts were successful or had the intended consequences for older people. Involvement of older people in designing improvement activities could ensure that care and support reflect their needs and preferences, and build positive experiences of care and support.

Funding and planning for social care in later life: a deliberative focus group study.

This study examined people's perceptions and behaviours in relation to planning for their social care needs, and their values and priorities concerning how social care should be funded. Eight deliberative focus groups were conducted in May 2018 with 53 participants, aged 25-82 years, in London, Manchester and rural locations near York and Sheffield. Multiple uncertainties created barriers to planning for social care needs including not knowing how much to save, not thinking it possible for an average person to save enough to meet significant needs, reluctance to plan for something potentially unnecessary, lack of suitable and secure ways of saving, and a perception of social care policy as unsettled. Participants also had significant concerns that they would not be able to obtain good-quality care, regardless of resources. In addition, it was commonly thought unrealistic to expect families to provide more than low-intensity, supplementary care, while use of housing assets to pay for care was considered unfair, both for home-owners who could lose their assets and non-home-owners who were left reliant on the state although it was more acceptable where people were childless or had substantial assets. Participants thought any new arrangements should be inclusive, personally affordable, sustainable, transparent, good-quality and honest. They preferred to contribute regularly rather than find considerable sums of money at times of crisis, and preferred to risk-pool, with everyone obliged or heavily encouraged to contribute. Transparency was valued so those better at 'working the system' were not able to benefit unfairly  and participants wanted to know that, if they contributed, they would be assured of good-quality care. Trust in Government and other institutions, however, was low. New funding arrangements should incorporate measures to increase transparency and trust, be clear about the responsibilities of individuals and the state, provide meaningful options to save, and place significant focus on improving actual and perceived care quality. For acceptability, proposals should be framed to emphasise their affective dimensions and positive values.

Exploring improvement plans of fourteen European integrated care sites for older people with complex needs.

Integrated care programmes are increasingly being put in place to provide care to older people living at home. However, knowledge about further improving integrated care is limited. In fourteen integrated care sites in Europe, plans to improve existing ways of working were designed, implemented and evaluated to enlarge the understanding of what works and with what outcomes when improving integrated care. This paper provides insight into the existing ways that the sites were working with respect to integrated care, their perceived difficulties and their plans for working towards improvement. The seven components of the Expanded Chronic Care Model provided a conceptual framework for describing the fourteen sites. Although sites were spread across Europe and differed in basic characteristics and existing ways of working, a number of difficulties in delivering integrated care were similar. Existing ways of working and improvement plans mostly focused on three components of the Expanded Chronic Care Model: delivery system design; decision support; self-management. Two components were represented less frequently in existing ways of working and improvement plans: building healthy public policy; building community capacity. These findings suggest that broadly-based prevention efforts, population health promotion and community involvement remain limited. From the Expanded Chronic Care Model perspective, therefore, opportunities for improving integrated care outcomes may continue to be restricted by the narrow focus of developed improvement plans.

The SUSTAIN Project: A European Study on Improving Integrated Care for Older People Living at Home.

INTRODUCTION: Integrated care programmes are increasingly being put in place to provide care to older people who live at home. Knowledge of how to further develop integrated care and how to transfer successful initiatives to other contexts is still limited. Therefore, a cross-European research project, called Sustainable Tailored Integrated Care for Older People in Europe (SUSTAIN), has been initiated with a twofold objective: 1. to collaborate with local stakeholders to support and monitor improvements to established integrated care initiatives for older people with multiple health and social care needs. Improvements focus on person-centredness, prevention orientation, safety and efficiency; 2. to make these improvements applicable and adaptable to other health and social care systems, and regions in Europe. This paper presents the overall structure and approach of the SUSTAIN project. METHODS: SUSTAIN uses a multiple embedded case study design. In three phases, SUSTAIN partners: (i) conduct interviews and workshops with stakeholders from fourteen established integrated care initiatives to understand where they would prefer improvements to existing ways of working; (ii) collaborate with local stakeholders to support the design and implementation of improvement plans, evaluate implementation progress and outcomes per initiative, and carry out overarching analyses to compare the different initiatives, and; (iii) translate knowledge and experience to an online roadmap. DISCUSSION: SUSTAIN aims to generate evidence on how to improve integrated care, and apply and transfer the knowledge gained to other health and social care systems, and regions. Lessons learned will be brought together in practical tools to inform and support policy-makers and decision-makers, as well as other stakeholders involved in integrated care, to manage and improve care for older people living at home.

Costs and economic consequences of a help-at-home scheme for older people in England.

Solutions to support older people to live independently and reduce the cost of an ageing population are high on the political agenda of most developed countries. Help-at-home schemes offer a mix of community support with the aim to address a range of well-being needs. However, not much is currently known about the costs, outcomes and economic consequences of such schemes. Understanding their impact on individuals' well-being and the economic consequences for local and central government can contribute to decisions about sustainable long-term care financing. This article presents results from a mixed-methods study of a voluntary sector-provided help-at-home scheme in England for people of 55 years and older. The study followed a participatory approach, which involved staff and volunteers. Data were collected during 2012 and 2013. Social care-related quality of life was measured with the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for 24 service users (59% response rate) when they started using the scheme and 4-6 months later. A customised questionnaire that captured resource use and well-being information was sent to 1064 service users (63% response rate). The same tool was used in assessment with service users who started using the scheme between November 2012 and April 2013 (100% response rate). Costs of the scheme were established from local budget and activity data. The scheme was likely to achieve a mean net benefit of £1568 per person from a local government and National Health Service (NHS) perspective and £3766 from the perspective of the individual. An expenditure of £2851 per person accrued to central government for the additional redistribution of benefit payments to older people. This article highlights the potential contribution of voluntary sector-run help-at-home schemes to an affordable welfare system for ageing societies.

Governance and public involvement in the British National Health Service: understanding difficulties and developments.

The article considers the role of public involvement in the British National Health Service in the context of the wider shift from government to governance. Based on a comparative case study, it identifies different outcomes from a single policy initiative in two localities. It argues, following Jessop, that accounts of governance which rest on inter-organisational relationships are inadequate, and that we also need to look at inter-systemic and inter-personal levels for more complete explanations. Investigating the relationships between these levels, we derive an account of governance within which to situate the role of public involvement. It is against this background that we focus on why the methods of involvement deserve greater attention for their substantive contribution to its quality and effectiveness.

Development of integrated care in England and the Netherlands: managing across public-private boundaries.

This paper addresses the impact of the public-private mix in the Dutch and English health and social care systems on the development and delivery of integrated care. Integrated care is conceived of as an organisational process of coordination which seeks to achieve seamless and continuous care, tailored to the patients' needs and based on a holistic view of the patient. We describe both systems' structures and characteristics from a historical perspective, which means that developments and processes within the systems are put in the spotlight. We demonstrate that the dividing- or fault-lines, such as the financial split between short-term and long-term care in the Netherlands and the divisions between health and social care as well as between the public, private and voluntary sectors in England have hindered integrated care development and delivery in both countries. Contradictory interests, differences in professional and organisational cultures, power relations, and mistrust between and within these sectors have had a clear impact on integrated care development and delivery within networks of public authorities and public and/or private providers. We explain these phenomena in terms of network theory as a basis for drawing lessons for policy makers and those developing integrated care networks.

Reducing emergency bed-days for older people? Network governance lessons from the 'Improving the Future for Older People' programme.

In 2007, the UK government set performance targets and public service agreements to control the escalation of emergency bed-days. Some years earlier, nine English local authorities had each created local networks with their health and third sector partners to tackle this increase. These networks formed the 'Improving the Future for Older People' initiative (IFOP), one strand of the national 'Innovation Forum' programme, set up in 2003. The nine sites set themselves one headline target to be achieved jointly over three years; a 20 per cent reduction in the number of emergency bed-days used by people aged 75 and over. Three ancillary targets were also monitored: emergency admissions, delayed discharges and project sustainability. Collectively the sites exceeded their headline target. Using a realistic evaluation approach, we explored which aspects of network governance appeared to have contributed to these emergency bed-day reductions. We found no simple link between network governance type and outcomes. The governance features associated with an effective IFOP network appeared to suggest that the selection and implementation of a small number of evidence-based services was central to networks' effectiveness. Each service needed to be coordinated by a network-based strategic group and hierarchically implemented at operational level by the responsible network member. Having a network-based implementation group with a 'joined-at-the-top' governance structure also appeared to promote network effectiveness. External factors, including NHS incentives, health reorganisations and financial targets similarly contributed to differences in performance. Targets and financial incentives could focus action but undermine horizontal networking. Local networks should specify which interventions network structures are intended to deliver. Effective projects are those likely to be evidence based, unique to the network and difficult to implement through vertical structures alone.

Does integrated governance lead to integrated patient care? Findings from the innovation forum.

Good integration of services that aim to reduce avoidable acute hospital bed use by older people requires frontline staff to be aware of service options and access them in a timely manner. In three localities where closer inter-organisational integration was taking place, this research sought patients' perceptions of the care received across and within organisational boundaries. Between February and July 2008, qualitative methods were used to map the care journeys of 18 patients (six from each site). Patient interviews (46) covered care received before, at the time of and following a health crisis. Additional interviews (66) were undertaken with carers and frontline staff. Grounded theory-based approaches showed examples of well-integrated care against a background of underuse of services for preventing health crises and a reliance on 'traditional' referral patterns and services at the time of a health crisis. There was scope to raise both practitioner and patient awareness of alternative care options and to expand the availability and visibility of care 'closer to home' services such as rapid response teams. Concerns voiced by patients centred on the adequacy of arrangements for organising ongoing care, while family members reported being excluded from discussions about care arrangements and the roles they were expected to play. The coordination of care was also affected by communication difficulties between practitioners (particularly across organisational boundaries) and a lack of compatible technologies to facilitate information sharing. Finally, closer organisational integration seemed to have limited impact on care at the patient/practitioner interface. To improve care experienced by patients, organisational integration needs to be coupled with vertical integration within organisations to ensure that strategic goals influence the actions of frontline staff. As they experience the complete care journey, feedback from patients can play an important role in the service redesign agenda.

Dimensions of choice in the assessment and care management process: the views of older people, carers and care managers.

The aim of promoting the maximum possible choice for service users and carers is - together with the goal of greater independence - central to recent community care policies. This paper sets out a typology of those key choices which users and carers are expected to be able to make within each stage of the assessment and care management process: choices about what services, when to receive them (i.e. at what times and for what duration) and from whom (i.e. which provider organization and which individual care worker). Drawing on interviews with 28 older service users, 20 informal carers and 22 care managers across four local authority areas in England, the paper goes on to describe the extent to which such choices - both at the strategic/macro and operation/micro level - have increased or decreased in practice. The evidence confirms that of other recent studies that the gap between the 'ideal' of user and carer involvement and the 'reality' of everyday practice is still considerable.

Interagency and interprofessional collaboration in community care: the interdependence of structures and values.

This paper considers the problems of interagency and interprofessional collaboration in community care in Great Britain from the combined perspectives of UK and US researchers. The research team drew on empirical and theoretical literature from both countries to construct a framework for analysing inter- and intra-organisational theories of joint working. This analysis, supplemented and supported by local case studies conducted by the researchers, generates a framework recommendation against which the government's initiatives for partnership working in the NHS plan 2000 and subsequently can be critically reviewed. In particular, at a time when structural integration--via Care Trusts--is being seriously considered, they highlight the vital importance of integrated systems of goal setting, authority and multidisciplinary service delivery rather than a narrow focus on structural integration alone.