Making integration work

Overcoming walls and voids: Responsive practices that enable frontline workers to feel heard

BACKGROUND

There is increasing recognition that beyond frontline workers' ability to speak up, their feeling heard is also vital, both for improving work processes and reducing burnout. However, little is known about the conditions under which frontline workers feel heard.

PURPOSE

This inductive qualitative study identifies barriers and facilitators to feeling heard among nurses in hospitals.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted in-depth semistructured interviews with registered nurses, nurse managers, and nurse practitioners across four hospitals ( N = 24) in a U.S. health system between July 2021 and March 2022. We coded with the aim of developing new theory, generating initial codes by studying fragments of data (lines and segments), examining and refining codes across transcripts, and finally engaging in focused coding across all data collected.

FINDINGS

Frontline nurses who spoke up confronted two types of challenges that prevented feeling heard: (a) walls, which describe organizational barriers that lead ideas to be rejected outright (e.g., empty solicitation), and (b) voids, which describe organizational gaps that lead ideas to be lost in the system (e.g., structural mazes). We identified categories of responsive practices that promoted feeling heard over walls (boundary framing, unscripting, priority enhancing) and voids (procedural transparency, identifying a navigator). These practices appeared more effective when conducted collectively over time.

CONCLUSION

Both walls and voids can prevent frontline workers from feeling heard, and these barriers may call for distinct managerial practices to address them. Future efforts to measure responsive practices and explore them in broader samples are needed.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Encouraging responsive practices may help ensure that frontline health care workers feel heard.

Commentary on "Integrating network theory into the study of integrated healthcare"

As medicine continues to advance, fragmentation problems in care delivery - and the promise of care integration to solve them - will remain central. But focused research over the past thirty years has yet to uncover the key factors that enable integrated care. In their paper, Burns and colleagues offer a path to new discovery in this well-trodden area: drawing on network theory to better understand the social processes through which integrated care is produced. Social processes are a vital and understudied aspect of integration, and applying network theory may help to refocus integration in a more comprehensive way. However, to transform our understanding of integrated care - and to enable impact in practice - will require expansion beyond the usual network approaches to also capture the communication and work processes that occur among entities. This is no small endeavor. It will take considerable humility, open-mindedness, and focus.

Integrating network theory into the study of integrated healthcare

Healthcare policy in the United States (U.S.) has focused on promoting integrated healthcare to combat fragmentation (e.g., 1993 Health Security Act, 2010 Affordable Care Act). Researchers have responded by studying coordination and developing typologies of integration. Yet, after three decades, research evidence for the benefits of coordination and integration are lacking. We argue that research efforts need to refocus in three ways: (1) use social networks to study relational coordination and integrated healthcare, (2) analyze integrated healthcare at three levels of analysis (micro, meso, macro), and (3) focus on clinical integration as the most proximate impact on patient outcomes. We use examples to illustrate the utility of such refocusing and present avenues for future research.

Social Features of Integration in Health Systems and Their Relationship to Provider Experience, Care Quality and Clinical Integration

More is known about the structural features of health system integration than the social features-elements of normative integration (alignment of norms) and interpersonal integration (collaboration among professionals and with patients). We surveyed practice managers and 1,360 staff and physicians at 59 practice sites within 17 health systems (828 responses; 61%). Building on prior theory, we developed and established the psychometric properties of survey measures describing normative and interpersonal integration. Normative and interpersonal integration were both consistently related to better provider experience, perceived care quality, and clinical integration (e.g., a 1-point increase in a practice's normative integration was associated with 0.53-point higher job satisfaction and 0.77-point higher perceived care quality in the practice, measured on 1 to 5 scales, p < .01). Variation in social features of integration may help explain why some health systems better integrate care, pointing to normative and interpersonal integration as potential resources for improvement.

Higher Medicare Expenditures Are Associated With Better Integrated Care as Perceived by Patients

BACKGROUND

Integrated care that is continuous, coordinated and patient-centered is vital for Medicare beneficiaries, but its relationship to health care expenditures remains unclear.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

This study explores-for the first time-the relationship between integrated care, as measured from the patient's perspective, and health care expenditures.

METHODS

Subjects include a sample of continuously eligible fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries (n=8807) in 2015. Analyses draw on 7 previously validated measures of patient-perceived integrated care from the 2015 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. These data are combined with 2015 administrative utilization data that measure health care expenditures. Relationships between patient-perceived integrated care and costs are assessed using generalized linear models with comprehensive control measures.

RESULTS

Patients who perceive more integrated care have higher expenditures for many, but not all, cost categories examined. Aspects of integrated care pertaining to primary provider and specialist care are associated with higher costs in several areas (particularly inpatient costs associated with specialist knowledge of the patient). Office staff members' knowledge of the patient's medical history is associated with lower home health costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who experience their care as more integrated may have higher expenditures on average. Thoughtful policy choices, further research, and innovations that enable patients to perceive integrated care at lower or neutral cost are needed.