Case management after acquired brain injury compared to care as usual: study protocol for a 2-year pragmatic randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel groups

A Realist Evaluation of Case Management Models for People with Complex Health Conditions Using Novel Methods and Tools-What Works, for Whom, and under What Circumstances?

Case management developed from a generalist model to a person-centred model aligned with the evidence-informed evolution of best practice people-centred integrated care. Case management is a multidimensional and collaborative integrated care strategy where the case manager performs a set of interventions/actions to support the person with a complex health condition to progress in their recovery pathway and participate in life roles. It is currently unknown what case management model works in real life for whom and under what circumstances. The purpose of this study was to answer these questions. The study methods used realistic evaluation framework, examined the patterns and associations between case manager actions (mechanisms), the person's characteristics and environment (context), and recovery (outcomes) over 10 years post severe injury. There was mixed methods secondary analysis of data extracted via in-depth retrospective file reviews (n = 107). We used international frameworks and a novel approach with multi-layered analysis including machine learning and expert guidance for pattern identification. The study results confirm that when provided, a person-centred case management model contributes to and enhances the person's recovery and progress towards participation in life roles and maintaining well-being after severe injury.Furthermore, the intensity of case management for people with traumatic brain injury, and the person-centred actions of advising, emotional and motivational support, and proactive coordination contribute to the person achieving their goals. The results provide learnings for case management services on the case management models, for quality appraisal, service planning, and informs further research on case management.

What Does It Take to Get Somebody back to Work after Severe Acquired Brain Injury? Service Actions within the Vocational Intervention Program (VIP 2.0)

Little is known about service actions delivered in the complex intervention of vocational rehabilitation (VR) for people with severe acquired brain injury (ABI). Scale-up of the Vocational Intervention Program (VIP) across the 12 Community teams of the NSW Brain Injury Rehabilitation Program provided an opportunity to analyse the intensity and profile of actions delivered in providing VR programs. Seventy-two participants with severe TBI were supported in returning to either pre-injury employment (FastTrack, FT, n = 27) or new employment (NewTrack, NT, n = 50), delivered by two types of VR providers (Disability Employment Service DES; private providers). VR providers documented their service actions in hours and minutes, using the Case Management Taxonomy, adapted to VR. The NT pathway required significantly higher levels of intervention in comparison to FT (25 h, five minutes vs. 35 h, 30 min, p = 0.048, W = 446). Case coordination was the most frequent service action overall (41.7% of total time for FT, 42.3% for NT). DES providers recorded significantly greater amounts of time undertaking engagement, assessment and planning, and emotional/motivational support actions compared to private providers. Overall duration of the programs were a median of 46 weeks (NT) and 36 weeks (FT), respectively. This study helps illuminate the profile of VR interventions for people with severe TBI.

Vagueness and Ambiguity in Communication of Case Management: A Content Analysis in the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme

Case management (CM) is an integrated care strategy, characterised by a set of actions to support person-centred planning, coordination of health and social services. Decades of CM, organisational psychology and occupational research highlight how vagueness and ambiguity in role communication can create role conflict and job stress, negatively impacts staff turnover, intra-organisational collaboration, job performance, and that poor communication of CM impedes policy, quality analysis service development and practice. We conducted a detailed top-down hierarchical, quality analysis of communication about CM roles and responsibilities in a Scheme for people with disability in Australia. The study used content analysis methods and the main actions as defined in a validated CM taxonomy (Appendix 1). We systematically searched and analysed 53 Scheme policy and practice documents of CM from 2013-2019. The results showed poor role communication with vagueness, ambiguity, gaps in the description of CM roles and responsibilities. Poor role communication has contributed to negative experiences and outcomes of CM actions of planning and coordination, as reported by CM users in many Scheme-related parliamentary inquiries, research, formal complaints, and decision appeals. The results reinforce the importance of an ontological approach in communication of CM roles and actions and provides learnings for integrated care roles across countries and contexts.