Managing multimorbidity in primary care

Evaluating the implementation of interdisciplinary patient-centred care intervention for people with multimorbidity in primary care: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

A patient-centred care interdisciplinary pragmatic intervention to support self-management for patients with multimorbidity was implemented in one region of Quebec, Canada. This embedded study aimed to evaluate the process of implementation.

DESIGN

A descriptive qualitative study was conducted in 2016-2017 using semistructured individual interviews. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to guide the data coding, analysis and reporting of the findings.

SETTING

The study took place in seven Family Medicine Groups in one region (Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean) of Quebec, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Ten managers (including two family physicians) and 19 healthcare professionals (HCPs), nurses, kinesiologists, nutritionists and a respiratory therapist, were interviewed.

RESULTS

Many key elements within the five CFIR domains were identified as impacting the implementation of the intervention : (1) intervention characteristics-evidence strength and quality, design quality and packaging, relative advantage and complexity; (2) outer setting-patients' needs and resources, external policies and incentives; (3) inner setting-structural characteristics, networks and communication, culture, compatibility, readiness for implementation and leadership engagement; (4) characteristics of the managers and HCPs-knowledge and belief about the intervention; (5) process-planning, opinion leaders, formally appointed internal implementation leaders, reflecting and evaluating.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed the organisational and contextual aspects of the implementation based on different and complementary perspectives. With the growing demand for interdisciplinary teams in primary care, we believe that our insights will be helpful for practices, researchers, and policymakers interested in the implementation of disease prevention and management programmes for people with multiple chronic conditions in primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02789800.

Bumpy road: implementing integrated psychiatric and somatic care in joint-specialty emergency departments: a mixed-method study using Normalization Process Theory

Purpose

Life expectancy is 15–20 years shorter for individuals with than for people without mental illness. Assuming that undiagnosed and undertreated somatic conditions are significant causes, the Central Denmark Region set out to implement joint psychiatric and somatic emergency departments (EDs) to support integrated psychiatric/somatic care as an effort to prolong the lifetime of individuals with mental illness. Through the lens of Normalization Process Theory, the authors examine healthcare frontline staff’s perceptions of and work with the implementation of integrated psychiatric/somatic care in the first joint-specialty ED in Denmark.

Design/methodology/approach

A single-case mixed-methods study using Normalization Process Theory (NPT) as an analytic framework to evaluate implementation of psychiatric/somatic integrated care (IC) in a joint-specialty emergency department. Data were generated from observations, qualitative interviews and questionnaires distributed to the frontline staff.

Findings

Implementation was characterized by a diffuse normalization leading to an adaption of the IC in a fuzzy alignment with existing practice. Especially, confusion among the staff regarding how somatic examination in the ED would ensure prolonged lifetime for people with mental illness was a barrier to sense-making and development of coherence among the staff. The staff questioned the accuracy of IC in the ED even though they recognized the need for better somatic care for individuals with mental illness.

Practical implications

This study highlights that a focus on outcomes (prolonging lifetime for people with mental illness and reducing stigmatization) can be counterproductive. Replacing the outcome focus with an output focus, in terms of how to develop and implement psychiatric/somatic IC with the patient perspective at the center, would probably be more productive.

Originality/value

In 2020, the Danish Health Authorities published new whole-system recommendations for emergency medicine (EM) highlighting the need for intensifying integrated intra and interorganizational care including psychiatric/somatic IC (ref). Even though this study is not conclusive, it points to subjects that can help to identify resources needed to implement psychiatric/somatic IC and to pitfalls. The authors argue that the outcome focus, prolonging the lifetime for individuals with mental illness by identifying somatic illness, was counterproductive. In accordance with the recommendations of contemporary implementation studies, the authors recommend a shift in focus from outcome to output focus; how to develop and implement psychiatric/somatic IC.