Crisis leadership behaviors in healthcare: survey validation and influence on staff outcomes in primary care clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic triggered an unprecedented transition from in-person to virtual delivery of primary health care services. Leaders were at the helm of the rapid changes required to make this happen, yet outcomes of leaders' behaviours were largely unexplored. This study (1) develops and validates the Crisis Leadership and Staff Outcomes (CLSO) Survey and (2) investigates the leadership behaviours exhibited during the transition to virtual care and their influence on select staff outcomes in primary care. METHODS: We tested the CLSO Survey amongst leaders and staff from four Community Health Centres in Ontario, Canada. The CLSO Survey measures a range of crisis leadership behaviors, such as showing empathy and promoting learning and psychological safety, as well as perceived staff outcomes in four areas: innovation, teamwork, feedback, and commitment to change. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis to investigate factor structure and construct validity. We report on the scale's internal consistency through Cronbach's alpha, and associations between leadership scales and staff outcomes through odds ratios. RESULTS: There were 78 staff and 21 middle and senior leaders who completed the survey. A 4-factor model emerged, comprised of the leadership behaviors of (1) "task-oriented leadership" and (2) "person-oriented leadership", and select staff outcomes of (3) "commitment to sustaining change" and (4) "performance self-evaluation". Scales exhibited strong construct and internal validity. Task- and person-oriented leadership behaviours positively related to the two staff outcomes. CONCLUSION: The CLSO Survey is a reliable measure of leadership behaviours and select staff outcomes. Our results suggest that crisis leadership is multifaceted and both person-oriented and task-oriented leadership behaviours are critical during a crisis to improve perceived staff performance and commitment to change.

Multiple case study of processes used by hospitals to select performance indicators: do they align with best practices?

Several health policy institutes recommend reducing the number of indicators monitored by hospitals to better focus on indicators most relevant to local contexts. To determine which indicators are the most appropriate to eliminate, one must understand how indicator selection processes are undertaken. This study classifies hospital indicator selection processes and analyzes how they align with practices outlined in the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework. This qualitative, multiple case study examined indicator selection processes used by four large acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Data were collected through 13 semistructured interviews and document analysis. A thematic analysis compared processes to the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework. Two types of hospital indicator selection processes were identified. Hospitals deployed most elements found within the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework including setting clear aims, having governance structures, considering indicators required by health agencies, and categorizing indicators into strategic themes. Framework elements largely absent included: adopting evidence-based selection criteria; incorporating finance and human resources indicators; considering if indicators measure structures, processes, or outcomes; and engaging a broader set of end users in the selection process. Hospitals have difficulty in balancing how to monitor government-mandated indicators with indicators more relevant to local operations. Hospitals often do not involve frontline managers in indicator selection processes. Not engaging frontline managers in selecting indicators may risk hospitals only choosing government-mandated indicators that are not reflective of frontline operations or valued by those managers accountable for improving unit-level performance.

On the same page? A qualitative study of shared mental models in an interprofessional, inter-organizational team implementing goal-oriented care.

Goal-oriented care is an approach to care delivery that uses patient-identified goals to drive care planning. Implementing goal-oriented care requires team members to cognitively shift the focus from "what is the matter" to "what matters to patients," and align their mental models of what it means to care for patients. Yet, no empirical studies of goal-oriented care apply evidence from the cognitive sciences, such as Shared Mental Model (SMM) theory. We conducted a qualitative case study of an interprofessional team that adopted goal-oriented care in Vermont, US (n = 18). Guided by SMM theory, we distinguished between task-related and team-related mental models. We used framework analysis and qualitative content analysis to determine mental model content and similarity. The most shared content areas were operationalizing goal-oriented care, engaging in formal and informal communication, taking a "whole-person" approach, taking a team approach, and building trusting relationships with patients and with other team members. Trust was the only construct that spanned both task and team mental model categories, highlighting the importance of both intra-team trust and provider-patient trust to the implementation of goal-oriented care. Team members developed SMMs through training, regular meetings, and interactions during care delivery. This study provides insight into the cognitive mechanisms that underlie team-based goal-oriented care delivery, which can be used to inform implementation, training content, and future research.

On the same page? A qualitative study protocol on collaboration in a multi-laboratory preclinical study.

INTRODUCTION: Medical advancements are slow to reach the patient bedside due to issues with knowledge translation from preclinical studies. Multi-laboratory preclinical studies are a promising strategy for addressing the methodological deficiencies that weaken the translational impact of single laboratory findings. However, multi-laboratory preclinical studies are rare and difficult, requiring strong collaboration to plan and execute a shared protocol. In multiteam systems such as these, collaboration is enhanced when members have cohesive ways of thinking about their goals and how to achieve them-that is, when they have "shared mental models". In this research project, we will examine how members of Canada's first multi-laboratory preclinical study build shared mental models and collaborate in the execution of their study. METHODS: Six independent labs in Canada will conduct a preclinical study using a common protocol. To investigate mental models and collaboration in this multiteam system we will conduct a longitudinal qualitative study involving interviews at four time points, team observation, and document analysis. We will analyze interview transcripts using deductive coding to produce a matrix analysis of mental model content over time and inductive coding to produce a thematic analysis of members' experiences of collaboration over time. We will also triangulate data sources to "tell the story" of teamwork, capturing events and contextual information that explain changes in mental models and collaboration over time. DISCUSSION: This study will be one of the most comprehensive longitudinal analyses of a real-world multiteam system, and the first within a preclinical laboratory setting. The results will contribute to our understanding of collaboration in multiteam systems, an organizational form increasingly used to tackle complex scientific and social problems. The results will also inform the implementation of future multi-laboratory preclinical studies, enhancing the likelihood of effective collaboration and improved 'bench to bedside' translation.

Centralization and innovation: Competing priorities for health systems?

Over the last 15 years, there has been a trend in Canada to centralise the provision of health services that were previously administratively and fiscally decentralised. Canadian policy rhetoric on centralisation often identifies improved innovation as an anticipated outcome. This paper challenges the assumed relationship between centralisation and innovation. We incorporate evidence from the management literature into the debate on the structure of health systems to explore the effects that centralisation is likely to have on innovation in health systems. The findings of this paper will be of interest to international policymakers, who are currently grappling with the prospect of maintaining a decentralised approach or adopting a more centralised health system structure in the future.

Incentivizing performance in health care: a rapid review, typology and qualitative study of unintended consequences.

BACKGROUND: Health systems are increasingly implementing policy-driven programs to incentivize performance using contracts, scorecards, rankings, rewards, and penalties. Studies of these "Performance Management" (PM) programs have identified unintended negative consequences. However, no single comprehensive typology of the negative and positive unintended consequences of PM in healthcare exists and most studies of unintended consequences were conducted in England or the United States. The aims of this study were: (1) To develop a comprehensive typology of unintended consequences of PM in healthcare, and (2) To describe multiple stakeholder perspectives of the unintended consequences of PM in cancer and renal care in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review of unintended consequences of PM in healthcare (n = 41 papers) to develop a typology of unintended consequences. We then conducted a secondary analysis of data from a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 147 participants involved with or impacted by a PM system used to oversee 40 care delivery networks in Ontario, Canada. Participants included administrators and clinical leads from the networks and the government agency managing the PM system. We undertook a hybrid inductive and deductive coding approach using the typology we developed from the rapid review. RESULTS: We present a comprehensive typology of 48 negative and positive unintended consequences of PM in healthcare, including five novel unintended consequences not previously identified or well-described in the literature. The typology is organized into two broad categories: unintended consequences on (1) organizations and providers and on (2) patients and patient care. The most common unintended consequences of PM identified in the literature were measure fixation, tunnel vision, and misrepresentation or gaming, while those most prominent in the qualitative data were administrative burden, insensitivity, reduced morale, and systemic dysfunction. We also found that unintended consequences of PM are often mutually reinforcing. CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive typology provides a common language for discourse on unintended consequences and supports systematic, comparable analyses of unintended consequences across PM regimes and healthcare systems. Healthcare policymakers and managers can use the results of this study to inform the (re-)design and implementation of evidence-informed PM programs.

Selecting Performance Indicators and Targets in Health Care: An International Scoping Review and Standardized Process Framework.

Objective: Health care organizations monitor hundreds of performance indicators. It is unclear what processes and criteria organizations use to identify the indicators they use, who is involved in these processes, how performance targets are set, and what the impacts of these processes are. The purpose of this study is to synthesize international approaches to indicator selection and develop a standardized process framework. Methods: Using the PubMed and Web of Science search engines, a scoping review of peer reviewed and grey literature following PRISMA-ScR guidelines was conducted to identify documents describing indicator selection processes used by health systems. English-language papers from 11 countries published from 2010 to 2020 were included. Papers were thematically analyzed to develop a standardized process framework. Results: The review included 33 peer-reviewed papers and 11 grey-literature documents. While there are common practices used in health care to select indicators, no single standardized process framework for indicator selection exists. Arbitrary or incomplete indicator selection processes risk over-measurement, lack of alignment with strategic and operational goals, lack of support by end-users, and paralyzed decision-making ability. By consolidating international practices, we developed the 5-P indicator selection process framework to mitigate process risks and support high-quality indicator selection processes. Conclusion: The 5-P indicator selection process framework consists of five domains and 17 elements, and offers health care agencies a practical structure they can use to design indicator selection processes. The framework also provides researchers with a basis by which the implementation of these processes may be evaluated.

Implementing Coordinated Care Networks: The Interplay of Individual and Distributed Leadership Practices.

How does leadership emerge and function when multiple health care organizations come together to form a network? In this qualitative comparative case study, we draw on distributed leadership theory to examine the leadership practices that manifested during the implementation of three coordinated care networks. Thirty leaders and care providers participated in semistructured interviews. Interview data were inductively analyzed using thematic analysis. Although established in response to the same policy initiative, each case differed in its leadership approach and implementation strategy. We found that manifestation of distributed leadership was contingent on the presence of an individual leader who acted as a unifying force across their respective network. Our findings suggest that policies to encourage the development of interorganizational networks should include sufficient resources to support an individual leader who enables distributed leadership.

What do end-users want to know about managing the performance of healthcare delivery systems? Co-designing a context-specific and practice-relevant research agenda.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing interest in joint research priority-setting, few studies engage end-user groups in setting research priorities at the intersection of the healthcare and management disciplines. With health systems increasingly establishing performance management programmes to account for and incentivize performance, it is important to conduct research that is actionable by the end-users involved with or impacted by these programmes. The aim of this study was to co-design a research agenda on healthcare performance management with and for end-users in a specific jurisdictional and policy context. METHODS: We undertook a rapid review of the literature on healthcare performance management (n = 115) and conducted end-user interviews (n = 156) that included a quantitative ranking exercise to prioritize five directions for future research. The quantitative rankings were analysed using four methods: mean, median, frequency ranked first or second, and frequency ranked fifth. The interview transcripts were coded inductively and analysed thematically to identify common patterns across participant responses. RESULTS: Seventy-three individual and group interviews were conducted with 156 end-users representing diverse end-user groups, including administrators, clinicians and patients, among others. End-user groups prioritized different research directions based on their experiences and information needs. Despite this variation, the research direction on motivating performance improvement had the highest overall mean ranking and was most often ranked first or second and least often ranked fifth. The research direction was modified based on end-user feedback to include an explicit behaviour change lens and stronger consideration for the influence of context. CONCLUSIONS: Joint research priority-setting resulted in a practice-driven research agenda capable of generating results to inform policy and management practice in healthcare as well as contribute to the literature. The results suggest that end-users are keen to open the "black box" of performance management to explore more nuanced questions beyond "does performance management work?" End-users want to know how, when and why performance management contributes to behaviour change (or fails to) among front-line care providers.

Assessing the Delivery of Coordinated Care to Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease in Ontario, Canada: A Survey of Patients and Healthcare Professionals.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with advanced Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) have complex health needs, and thus require care that is coordinated across professionals and organizations. This study aimed to describe the extent of coordinated care delivery for patients with advanced CKD from the perspectives of both patients and healthcare professionals. METHODS: The Coordination Scale of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-26) survey was administered to a random sample of 14,257 patients on maintenance dialysis or receiving care in end-stage kidney disease preparation clinics in Ontario, Canada. A five-item survey was administered to 596 multidisciplinary nephrology professionals. RESULTS: Among the 1,925 patient respondents, 67% reported they had been referred to an allied health professional; 19% had been encouraged to attend programs in the community; and 34% had been told how their visits with other types of doctors helped their treatment (% reporting "always" or "most of the time"). Patient responses were significantly different by treatment modality/setting, but not by gender or geographic location of treatment facility. Among the 276 professional respondents, 37% reported their patients' care was well-coordinated across settings; 56% reported participating in interdisciplinary care planning discussions; and 53% reported they are aware of appropriate home and community services to support their patients (% reporting "always" or "most of the time"). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that care for patients with advanced CKD in Ontario is not consistently coordinated. Healthcare professionals may enhance patient perceptions of coordinated care through explicit communication with patients about how the professionals they see and treatments or services they receive influence their overall health and well-being. At a systems level, there is a need to improve professional awareness of and linkages to home- and community-based services.

Building capacity for palliative care delivery in primary care settings: Mixed-methods evaluation of the INTEGRATE Project.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an intervention aimed at building capacity to deliver palliative care in primary care settings. DESIGN: The INTEGRATE Project was a 3-year pilot project involving interprofessional palliative care education and an integrated care model to promote early identification and support of patients with palliative care needs. A concurrent mixed-methods evaluation was conducted using descriptive data, provider surveys before and after implementation, and interviews with providers and managers. SETTING: Four primary care practices in Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: All providers in each practice were invited to participate. Providers used the "surprise question" as a prompt to determine patient eligibility for inclusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Provider attitudes toward and confidence in providing palliative care, use of palliative care tools, delivery of palliative care, and perceived barriers to delivering palliative care. RESULTS: A total of 294 patients were identified for early initiation of palliative care, most of whom had multiple comorbid conditions. Results demonstrated improvement in provider confidence to deliver palliative care (30% mean increase, P < .05) and self-reported use of palliative care tools and services (25% mean increase, P < .05). There was substantial variation across practices regarding the percentage of patients identified using the surprise question (0.2% to 1.5%), the number of advance care planning conversations initiated (50% to 90%), and mean time to conversation (13 to 76 days). This variation is attributable, in part, to contextual differences across practices. CONCLUSION: A standardized model for the early introduction of palliative care to patients can be integrated into the routine practice of primary care practitioners with appropriate training and support. Additional research is needed to understand the practice factors that contribute to the success of palliative care interventions in primary care and to examine patient outcomes.

Divergent notions of "quality" in healthcare policy implementation: a framing perspective.

PURPOSE: This paper examines how "quality" was framed in the design and implementation of a policy to reform hospital funding and associated care delivery. The aims of the study were: (1) To describe how government policy-makers who designed the policy and managers and clinicians who implemented the policy framed the concept of "quality" and (2) To explore how frames of quality and the framing process may have influenced policy implementation. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors conducted a secondary analysis of data from a qualitative case study involving semi-structured interviews with 45 purposefully selected key informants involved in the design and implementation of the quality-based procedures policy in Ontario, Canada. The authors used framing theory to inform coding and analysis. FINDINGS: The authors found that policy designers perpetuated a broader frame of quality than implementers who held more narrow frames of quality. Frame divergence was further characterized by how informants framed the relationship between clinical and financial domains of quality. Several environmental and organizational factors influenced how quality was framed by implementers. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: As health systems around the world increasingly implement new models of governance and financing to strengthen quality of care, there is a need to consider how "quality" is framed in the context of these policies and with what effect. This is the first framing analysis of "quality" in health policy.

Implementing a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Hemodialysis Patients in Routine Clinical Care: Perspectives of Patients and Providers on ESAS-r:Renal.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal is a patient-reported outcome measure used to assess physical and psychosocial symptom burden in patients treated with maintenance dialysis. Studies of patient-reported outcome measures suggest the need for deeper understanding of how to optimize their implementation and use. This study examines patient and provider perspectives of the implementation process and the influence of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal on symptom management, patient-provider communication, and interdisciplinary communication. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Eight in-facility hemodialysis programs in Ontario, Canada, assessed patients using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal every 4-6 weeks for 1 year. Screening and completion rates were tracked, and pre- and postimplementation surveys and midimplementation interviews were conducted with patients and providers. A chart audit was conducted 12 months postimplementation. RESULTS: In total, 1459 patients completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal; 58% of eligible patients completed the preimplementation survey (n=718), and 56% of patients who completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal at least once completed the postimplementation survey (n=569). Provider survey response rates were 71% (n=514) and 54% (n=319), respectively. Nine patients/caregivers from three sites and 48 providers from all sites participated in interviews. A total of 1207 charts were audited. Seven of eight sites had mean screening rates over 80%, suggesting that routine use of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal in clinical practice is feasible. However, the multiple data sources painted an inconsistent picture of the value and effect of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal standardized symptom screening processes across providers and sites; improved patient and provider symptom awareness, particularly for psychosocial symptoms; and empowered patients to raise issues with providers. Yet, there was little, if any, statistically significant improvement in the metrics used to assess symptom management, patient-provider communication, and interdisciplinary communication. CONCLUSIONS: The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal patient-reported outcome measure may be useful to standardize symptom screening, enhance awareness of psychosocial symptoms among patients and providers, and empower patients rather than to reduce symptom burden.

From Measurement to Improvement in Ontario's Cancer System: Analyzing the Performance of 28 Provincial Indicators over 15 Years.

Over the past 15 years, Cancer Care Ontario has used a robust performance management approach to drive improvements in care. Each year, priority indicators and targets are selected or retained, and performance is reviewed quarterly with each of Ontario's Regional Cancer Programs. Improvement support and encouragement are provided, such as data analysis, program ranking, communities of practice, consultations, action plan requests and certificates. This article analyzes data on 28 indicators prioritized over these years and demonstrates that 25 have shown sustained improvement over time. The performance management approach, lessons learned and gaps in knowledge are described to inform future research and practice.

Out of sync: a Shared Mental Models perspective on policy implementation in healthcare.

The impact of policy ambiguity on implementation is a perennial concern in policy circles. The degree of ambiguity of policy goals and the means to achieve them influences the likelihood that a policy will be uniformly understood and implemented across implementation sites. We argue that the application of institutional and organisational theories to policy implementation must be supplemented by a socio-cognitive lens in which stakeholders' interpretations of policy are investigated and compared. We borrow the concept of 'Shared Mental Models' from the literature on industrial psychology to examine the microprocesses of policy implementation. Drawing from interviews with 45 key informants involved in the implementation of a hospital funding reform, known as Quality-Based Procedures in Ontario, Canada, we identify divergent mental models and explain how these divergences may have affected implementation and change management. We close with considerations for future research and practice.

Provincial Needs Assessment to Determine the Current State of Glomerulonephritis Care in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Despite its relative rarity, glomerulonephritis (GN) accounts for 20% of prevalent end-stage renal disease patients in Ontario. Early identification and appropriate management of GN to delay progression of disease can reduce patient morbidity and health system costs. As such, a provincial GN needs assessment was conducted to inform on the development of the provincial GN strategic framework in Ontario. OBJECTIVE: To understand the current state of GN care in Ontario from nephrologist, hospital administrator, and patient and family perspectives. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTINGS: 26 regional renal programs in Ontario. PATIENTS: 23 patients and family members living with GN who do not require renal replacement therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Patient and family member interviews as well as a survey of nephrologists. METHODS: The study included 3 components: (1) interviews with patients and family members, (2) a survey of nephrologists, and (3) interviews with regional renal programs. The Ontario Renal Network provincial office developed the needs assessment questions and the physician survey questions after consultation with practicing nephrologists and hospital administrators. Thematic analysis was used to assess interview data and descriptive statistics to assess survey data. RESULTS: Interviews with patients and family members (n = 23) identified gaps in care related to diagnosis and referral to nephrology care, education and decision-making, and psychosocial supports. The survey of nephrologists (n = 74) identified various issues that contribute to unstandardized GN care across Ontario, including a lack of provincial expertise in providing complex GN care, access to medication, multidisciplinary team support as well as patient education, and psychosocial supports. Interviews with regional renal programs aligned with interview and survey findings (n = 11). LIMITATIONS: Interviews with patients and family members were facilitated by 1 interviewer and limited to 20 interviews due to resource limitations. All nephrologists, patients, and family members who participated in the survey and interviews were volunteers and English-speaking, which may have resulted in self-selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: The provincial GN needs assessment emphasized the necessity to develop and implement a provincial GN strategy. The strategic framework includes 4 objectives: (1) ensure patients are supported to make informed decisions, (2) establish a provincial model of care, (3) leverage data to enable planning, decision-making, and monitoring of outcomes, and (4) ensure appropriate access to medication. This is the first Ontario strategy to address provincial gaps in GN care.

CONTEXTE: Malgré sa relative rareté, les glomérulonéphrites (GN) représentent 20 % des cas prévalents d'insuffisance rénale terminale en Ontario. Un diagnostic précoce et une prise en charge adéquate des GN pourraient réduire la morbidité pour les patients et les coûts pour le système de santé. Une analyse des besoins provinciaux (Ontario) en matière de soins des GN a été réalisée pour guider l'élaboration d'un cadre stratégique de gestion de la maladie. OBJECTIF: Connaître l'état actuel des soins en contexte de GN, en Ontario, du point de vue des néphrologues, des directions d'établissements, des patients et de leurs proches. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Étude transversale. CADRE: 26 programmes régionaux de lutte contre la maladie rénale en Ontario. SUJETS: Un total de 23 individus, soit des patients atteints de GN, mais ne nécessitant pas de thérapie de remplacement rénal, et des membres de leur entourage. MESURES: Des interviews de patients et de membres de leur entourage, ainsi qu'un sondage auprès de néphrologues. MÉTHODOLOGIE: L'étude comportait trois volets: (1) interview des patients et de leur entourage; (2) sondage auprès des néphrologues; (3) entretiens avec les responsables des programmes régionaux de lutte contre la maladie rénale. Le Réseau rénal de l'Ontario a mis au point les questions du sondage et les questions relatives à l'évaluation des besoins après avoir consulté des néphrologues en pratique et des administrateurs d'hôpitaux. Les données recueillies ont été traitées par analyses thématiques (interviews) et par statistiques descriptives (sondage). RÉSULTATS: L'interview des patients et de leur entourage (n = 23) a mis en évidence des lacunes dans les procédures liées au diagnostic et à l'aiguillage en néphrologie, de même que concernant l'éducation des patients, la prise de décisions et le soutien psychosocial. Le sondage des néphrologues (n = 74) a permis de déceler diverses lacunes contribuant à une prestation de soins non normalisée en Ontario, notamment vis-à-vis l'expertise provinciale dans la prestation de soins complexes en GN, l'accès aux médicaments, le soutien d'une équipe multidisciplinaire, l'éducation et le soutien psychosocial des patients. Les entretiens avec les responsables des programmes régionaux de lutte contre la maladie rénale (n = 11) concordaient avec les résultats des deux autres volets. LIMITES: Les interviews avec les patients et leur entourage ont été effectuées par une seule personne et restreintes à une vingtaine en raison de ressources limitées. Les néphrologues, patients et membres de leur entourage étaient tous anglophones et ont participé à l'étude sur une base volontaire, ce qui pourrait introduire un biais d'auto-sélection. CONCLUSION: L'évaluation des besoins provinciaux en matière de soins pour les GN a mis en lumière la nécessité d'élaborer et de mettre en œuvre une stratégie provinciale. Le cadre stratégique comprend quatre objectifs: (1) garantir aux patients le soutien nécessaire pour prendre des décisions éclairées, (2) établir un modèle de soins provincial, (3) exploiter les données pour permettre la planification, la prise de décision et le suivi des résultats, et (4) assurer un accès adéquat aux médicaments. Il s'agit de la première stratégie visant à combler les lacunes provinciales en matière de soins pour les GN en Ontario.

Integrating early palliative care into routine practice for patients with cancer: A mixed methods evaluation of the INTEGRATE Project.

OBJECTIVE: With increasing evidence from controlled trials on benefits of early palliative care, there is a need for studies examining implementation in real-world settings. The INTEGRATE Project was a 3-year real-world project that promoted early identification and support of patients with cancer who may benefit from palliative care. This study assesses feasibility, stakeholder experiences, and early impact of the INTEGRATE Project METHODS: The INTEGRATE Project was implemented in four cancer centers in Ontario, Canada, and consisted of interdisciplinary provider education and an integrated care model. Providers used the Surprise Question to identify patients for inclusion. A mixed methods evaluation of INTEGRATE was conducted using descriptive data, interviews with providers and managers, and provider surveys. RESULTS: A total of 760 patients with cancer (lung, glioblastoma, head and neck, gastrointestinal) were included. Results suggest improvement in provider confidence to deliver palliative care and to initiate the Advanced Care Planning (ACP) conversation. The majority of patients (85%) had an ACP or goals of care (GOC) conversation initiated within a mean time to conversation of 5-46 days (SD 20-93) across centers. A primary care report was transmitted to family doctors 48-100% of the time within a mean time to transmission of 7-54 days (SD 9-27) across centers. Enablers and barriers influencing success of the model were also identified. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized model for the early introduction of palliative care for patients with cancer can be integrated into the routine practice of oncology providers, with appropriate education, integration into existing clinical workflows, and administrative support.

Standardising costs or standardising care? Qualitative evaluation of the implementation and impact of a hospital funding reform in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Since 2011, the Government of Ontario, Canada, has phased in hospital funding reforms hoping to encourage standardised, evidence-based clinical care processes to both improve patient outcomes and reduce system costs. One aspect of the reform - quality-based procedures (QBPs) - replaced some of each hospital's global budget with a pre-set price per episode of care for patients with specific diagnoses or procedures. The QBP initiative included publication and dissemination of a handbook for each of these diagnoses or procedures, developed by an expert technical group. Each handbook was intended to guide hospitals in reducing inappropriate variation in patient care and cost by specifying an evidence-based episode of care pathway. We explored whether, how and why hospitals implemented these episode of care pathways in response to this initiative. METHODS: We interviewed key informants at three levels in the healthcare system, namely individuals who conceived and designed the QBP policy, individuals and organisations supporting QBP adoption, and leaders in five case-study hospitals responsible for QBP implementation. Analysis involved an inductive approach, incorporating framework analysis to generate descriptive and explanatory themes from data. RESULTS: The 46 key informants described variable implementation of best practice episode of care pathways across QBPs and across hospitals. Handbooks outlining evidence-based clinical pathways did not address specific barriers to change for different QBPs nor differences in hospitals' capacity to manage change. Hospitals sometimes found it easier to focus on containing and standardising costs of care than on implementing standardised care processes that adhered to best clinical practices. CONCLUSION: Implementation of QBPs in Ontario's hospitals depended on the interplay between three factors, namely complexity of changes required, internal capacity for organisational change, and availability and appropriateness of targeted external facilitators and supports to manage change. Variation in these factors across QBPs and hospitals suggests the need for more tailored and flexible implementation supports designed to fit all elements of the policy, rather than one-size-fits-all handbooks alone. Without such supports, hospitals may enact quick fixes aimed mainly at preserving budgets, rather than pursue evidence- and value-based changes in care management. Overestimating hospitals' change management capacity increases the risk of implementation failure.

Correction: Qualitative analysis of the dynamics of policy design and implementation in hospital funding reform.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191996.].