A delicate balance: how physicians manage change towards collaborative care within their institutions

Purpose In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in 2020-2022, the immutable and fragmented character of our healthcare system changed. Healthcare professionals and their institutional leads proved remarkably agile and managed to change toward collaborative care. The purpose of this paper is to examine experiences with collaborative practice in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic in two regions in the Netherlands, to explore and understand the relationship between policy and practice and the potential development of new collaborative care routines. Design/methodology/approach Using a methodology informed by theories that have a focus on professional working practice (so called "activity theory") or the institutional decision-makers (discursive institutionalism), respectively, the perspective of physicians on the relationship between policy and practice was explored. Transcripts of meetings with physicians from different institutions and medical specialities about their collaborative COVID-19 care were qualitatively analysed. Findings The findings show how change during COVID-19 was primarily initiated from the bottom-up. Cultural-cognitive and normative forces in professional, collaborative working practice triggered the creation of new relationships and sharing of resources and capacity. The importance of top-down regulatory forces from institutional leads was less evident. Yet, both (bottom-up) professional legitimacy and (top-down) institutional support are mentioned as necessary by healthcare professionals to develop and sustain new collaborative routines. Practical implications The COVID-19 crisis provided opportunity to build better healthcare infrastructure by learning from the responses to this pandemic. Now is the time to find ways to integrate new ways of working initiated from the bottom-up with those longstanding ones initiated from top-down. Originality This paper presents a combination of theories for understanding collaboration in healthcare, which can inform future research into collaborative care initiatives.

Neutrophil and Eosinophil Responses Remain Abnormal for Several Months in Primary Care Patients With COVID-19 Disease

Introduction Neutrophil and eosinophil activation and its relation to disease severity has been understudied in primary care patients with COVID-19. In this study, we investigated whether the neutrophil and eosinophil compartment were affected in primary care patients with COVID-19. Methods COVID-19 patients, aged ≥ 40 years with cardiovascular comorbidity presenting to the general practitioner with substantial symptoms, partaking in the COVIDSat@Home study between January and April 2021, were included. Blood was drawn during and 3 to 6 months after active COVID-19 disease and analyzed by automated flow cytometry, before and after stimulation with a formyl-peptide (fNLF). Mature neutrophil and eosinophil markers at both time points were compared to healthy controls. A questionnaire was conducted on disease symptoms during and 3 to 6 months after COVID-19 disease. Results The blood of 18 COVID-19 patients and 34 healthy controls was analyzed. During active COVID-19 disease, neutrophils showed reduced CD10 (p = 0.0360), increased CD11b (p = 0.0002) and decreased CD62L expression (p < 0.0001) compared to healthy controls. During active COVID-19 disease, fNLF stimulated neutrophils showed decreased CD10 levels (p < 0.0001). Three to six months after COVID-19 disease, unstimulated neutrophils showed lowered CD62L expression (p = 0.0003) and stimulated neutrophils had decreased CD10 expression (p = 0.0483) compared to healthy controls. Both (un)stimulated CD10 levels increased 3 to 6 months after active disease (p = 0.0120 and p < 0.0001, respectively) compared to during active disease. Eosinophil blood counts were reduced during active COVID-19 disease and increased 3 to 6 months after infection (p < 0.0001). During active COVID-19, eosinophils showed increased unstimulated CD11b (p = 0.0139) and decreased (un)stimulated CD62L expression (p = 0.0036 and p = 0.0156, respectively) compared to healthy controls. Three to six months after COVID-19 disease, (un)stimulated eosinophil CD62L expression was decreased (p = 0.0148 and p = 0.0063, respectively) and the percentage of CD11bbright cells was increased (p = 0.0083 and p = 0.0307, respectively) compared to healthy controls. Conclusion Automated flow cytometry analysis reveals specific mature neutrophil and eosinophil activation patterns in primary care patients with COVID-19 disease, during and 3 to 6 months after active disease. This suggests that the neutrophil and eosinophil compartment are long-term affected by COVID-19 in primary care patients. This indicates that these compartments may be involved in the pathogenesis of long COVID.