Case management for at-risk elderly patients in the English integrated care pilots: observational study of staff and patient experience and secondary care utilisation

Back to basics: A mediation analysis approach to addressing the fundamental questions of integrated care evaluations

Health systems around the world are aiming to improve the integration of health and social care services to deliver better care for patients. Existing evaluations have focused exclusively on the impact of care integration on health outcomes and found little effect. That suggests the need to take a step back and ask whether integrated care programmes actually lead to greater clinical integration of care and indeed whether greater integration is associated with improved health outcomes. We propose a mediation analysis approach to address these two fundamental questions when evaluating integrated care programmes. We illustrate our approach by re-examining the impact of an English integrated care program on clinical integration and assessing whether greater integration is causally associated with fewer admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. We measure clinical integration using a concentration index of outpatient referrals at the general practice level. While we find that the scheme increased integration of primary and secondary care, clinical integration did not mediate a decrease in unplanned hospital admissions. Our analysis emphasizes the need to better understand the hypothesized causal impact of integration on health outcomes and demonstrates how mediation analysis can inform future evaluations and program design.

Studying both patient and staff experience to investigate their perceptions and to target key interactions to improve: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The improvement of patient experience (PE) is related to the experience of staff caring for them. Yet there is little evidence as to which interactions matter the most for both patients and staff, or how they are perceived by them. We aimed to summarise the interactions and the perceptions between patients and staff from studies by using both patient and staff experience data in healthcare institutions.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review, including studies dealing with PE and staff experience. Two authors independently reviewed each title/abstract and the selected full-text articles. A list of variables (objective, study design, data sources, tools used, results, interactions, perceptions and actions) was charted and summarised using a narrative approach including both qualitative and quantitative data. Studies were grouped according to their objective and the key interactions summarised according to this stratification. The perceptions of patients and staff were identified in the results of selected studies and were classified into four categories: commonalities and disagreements of perceptions, patients' perceptions not perceived by professionals and professional's perceptions not perceived by patients.

RESULTS

A total of 42 studies were included. The stratification of studies by type of objective resulted in six groups that allowed to classify the key interactions (n=154) identified in the results of the selected studies. A total of 128 perceptions related to interaction between patient and staff were reported with the following distribution: commonalities (n=35), disagreements (n=18), patients' perceptions not perceived by professionals (n=47) and professional's perceptions not perceived by patients (n=28). We separated positive and negative perceptions, which resulted in seven scenarios, each with actions that can be carried out for one or both populations to overcome barriers.

CONCLUSION

The study of both patient and staff experience allowed the identification of actions that can be taken to change the perceptions of patients and staff.

The effects of multi-disciplinary integrated care on healthcare utilization: Evidence from a natural experiment in the UK

Better integration is a priority for most international health systems. However, multiple interventions are often implemented simultaneously, making evaluation difficult and providing limited evidence for policy makers about specific interventions. We evaluate a common integrated care intervention, multi-disciplinary group (MDG) meetings for discussion of high-risk patients, introduced in one socio-economically deprived area in the UK in spring 2015. Using data from multiple waves of the national GP Patient Survey and Hospital Episode Statistics, we estimate its effects on primary and secondary care utilization and costs, health status and patient experience. We use triple differences, exploiting the targeting at people aged 65 years and over, parsing effects from other population-level interventions implemented simultaneously. The intervention reduced the probability of visiting a primary care nurse by three percentage points and decreased length of stay by 1 day following emergency care admission. However, since planned care use increased, overall costs were unaffected. MDG meetings are presumably fulfilling public health objectives by decreasing length of stay and detecting previously unmet needs. However, the effect of MDGs on health system cost is uncertain and health remains unchanged. Evaluations of specific integrated care interventions may be more useful to public decision makers facing budget constraints.

Why doesn't integrated care work? Using Strong Structuration Theory to explain the limitations of an English case

Integrated care is an aim and a method for organising health and care services, particularly for older people and those with chronic conditions. Policy expects that integrated care programmes will provide person-centred coordinated care which will improve patient or client experience, enable population health, prevent hospital admissions and thereby reduce costs. However, empirical evaluations of integrated care interventions have shown disappointing results. We analysed an in-depth case study using Strong Structuration Theory to ask: how and why have efforts to integrate health and social care failed to produce desired outcomes? In our case, integrated case management and the creation of cost-saving plans were dominant practices. People working in health and social care recursively produced a structure of integrated care: a recognised set of resources created by collective activities. Integrated care, intended to help patients manage their long-term conditions and avoid hospital admission, was only a small part of the complex network that sustained patients at home. The structures of integrated care were unable to compensate for changes in patients' health. The result was that patients' experiences remained largely unaffected and hospital admissions were not easily avoided.

Integrated Care in England - what can we Learn from a Decade of National Pilot Programmes?

Introduction

For more than a decade the English NHS has pursued integrated care through three national pilot programmes. The independent evaluators of these programmes here identify several common themes that inform the development of integrated care.

Description

The three pilot programmes shared the aim of better coordination between hospital and community-based health services and between health and social care. Each programme recruited local pilot sites that designed specific interventions to support inter-professional and inter-organisational collaboration.The pilots were highly heterogenous and results varied both within and between the three programmes. While staff were generally positive about their achievements, pilots had mixed success especially in reducing unplanned hospital admissions. Common facilitators to achieving pilots' objectives included effective senior leadership and shared values, simple interventions and additional funding. Barriers included short timescales, poor professional engagement, information and data sharing problems, and conflicts with changing national policy.

Discussion

There was little stable or shared understanding of what 'integrated care' meant resulting in different practices and priorities. An increasing focus on reducing unplanned hospital use among national sponsors created a mismatch in expectations between local and national actors.

Conclusion

Pilots in all three national programmes made some headway against their objectives but were limited in their impact on unplanned hospital admissions.

Comparison of the impact of two national health and social care integration programmes on emergency hospital admissions

Background

Policy-makers expect that integration of health and social care will improve user and carer experience and reduce avoidable hospital use. [We] evaluate the impact on emergency hospital admissions of two large nationally-initiated service integration programmes in England: the Pioneer (November 2013 to March 2018) and Vanguard (January 2015 to March 2018) programmes. The latter had far greater financial and expert support from central agencies.

Methods

Of the 206 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England, 51(25%) were involved in the Pioneer programme only, 22(11%) were involved in the Vanguard programme only and 13(6%) were involved in both programmes. We used quasi-experimental methods to compare monthly counts of emergency admissions between four groups of CCGs, before and after the introduction of the two programmes.

Results

CCGs involved in the programmes had higher monthly hospital emergency admission rates than non-participants prior to their introduction [7.9 (95% CI:7.8–8.1) versus 7.5 (CI: 7.4–7.6) per 1000 population]. From 2013 to 2018, there was a 12% (95% CI:9.5–13.6%) increase in emergency admissions in CCGs not involved in either programme while emergency admissions in CCGs in the Pioneer and Vanguard programmes increased by 6.4% (95% CI: 3.8–9.0%) and 8.8% (95% CI:4.5–13.1%), respectively. CCGs involved in both initiatives experienced a smaller increase of 3.5% (95% CI:-0.3–7.2%). The slowdown largely occurred in the final year of both programmes.

Conclusions

Health and social care integration programmes can mitigate but not prevent rises in emergency admissions over the longer-term. Greater financial and expert support from national agencies and involvement in multiple integration initiatives can have cumulative effects.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06692-x.

Does prevention-focused integration lead to the triple aim? An evaluation of two new care models in England

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of two integrated care models ('vanguards') in Salford and South Somerset in England, United Kingdom, in relation to patient experience, health outcomes and costs of care (the 'triple aim').

METHODS

We used difference-in-differences analysis combined with propensity score weighting to compare the two care model sites with control ('usual care') areas in the rest of England. We estimated combined and separate annual effects in the three years following introduction of the new care model, using the national General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) to measure patient experience (inter-organisational support with chronic condition management) and generic health status (EQ-5D); and hospital episode statistics (HES) data to measure total costs of secondary care. As secondary outcomes we measured proxies for improved prevention: cost per user of secondary care (severity); avoidable emergency admissions; and primary care utilisation.

RESULTS

Both intervention sites showed an increase in total costs of secondary care (approximately £74 per registered patient per year in Salford, £45 in South Somerset) and cost per user of secondary care (£130-138 per person per year). There were no statistically significant effects on health status or patient experience of care. There was a more apparent short-term negative effect on measured outcomes in South Somerset, in terms of increased costs and avoidable emergency admissions, but these reduced over time.

CONCLUSION

New care models such as those implemented within the Vanguard programme in England might lead to unintended secondary care cost increases in the short to medium term. Cost increases appeared to be driven by average patient severity increases in hospital. Prevention-focused population health management models of integrated care, like previous more targeted models, do not immediately improve the health system's triple aim.

Pharmacist-led cardiovascular risk prevention in Western Canada: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Preventing cardiovascular diseases (CVD) is a public health and policy priority, including for employers. A novel CVD risk management programme that included medication management was delivered by pharmacists to employees of a Canadian university. This qualitative study describes the experiences and perceptions of participants who received individual health consultations in this programme.

METHODS

A qualitative study design using free-text responses was adopted. Data (5658 words) came from evaluation surveys completed by 119 programme participants were iteratively coded and thematically analysed.

KEY FINDINGS

We identified four themes characterising participant experiences of pharmacist-led CVD prevention. Theme one was labelled self-efficacy because personalised health information and advice on CVD risk factor management empowered participants to make improvements for their health. Participants expressed a range of positive responses about the longer consultations, supportive communication and safe setting of their pharmacist-led encounters; hence, Theme two is labelled pharmacists' interpersonal skills. The wider context of the programme included a number of enabling factors (Theme three) that either supported or limited participant engagement in the programme. A number of changes to behaviour and health measures were identified and participant suggestions to expand and continue the programme further contributed to perceptions of positive programme impact (Theme four).

CONCLUSIONS

This study raises questions about how external resources and broader determinants might enable, or hinder, future programme success and sustainability. It also highlights the need for greater understanding and communication of the importance of primary prevention and the role of pharmacists in CVD risk reduction and workplace health promotion.

(Dis)Integrated Care? Lessons from East London

INTRODUCTION

This paper examines one of the NHS England Pioneers programmes of Integrated Care, which was implemented in three localities in East London, covering the area served by one of the largest hospital groups in the UK and bringing together commissioners, providers and local authorities. The partners agreed to build a model of integrated care that focused on the whole person. This qualitative and participatory evaluation looked at how an ambitious vision translated into the delivery of integrated care on the ground. The study explored the micro-mechanisms of integrated care relationships based on the experience of health and social care professionals working in acute and community care settings.

METHODS

We employed a participatory approach, the Researcher in Residence model, whereby the researcher was embedded in the organisations she evaluated and worked alongside managers and clinicians to build collaboration across the full range of stakeholders, develop shared learning, and find common ground through competing interests, while trying to address power imbalances. A number of complementary qualitative methods of data generation were used, including documentary analysis, participant observations, semi-structured interviews, and coproduction workshops with frontline health and social care professionals to interpret the data and develop recommendations.

RESULTS

Our fieldwork exposed persistent organisational fragmentation, despite the dominant rhetoric of integration and efforts to build a shared vision at senior governance levels. The evaluation identified several important themes, including: a growing barrier between acute and community services; a persisting difficulty experienced by health and social care staff in working together because of professional and cultural differences, as well as conflicting organisational priorities and guidelines; and a lack of capacity and support to deliver a genuine multidisciplinary approach in practice, despite the ethos of multiagency being embraced widely.

DISCUSSION

By focusing on professionals' working routines, we detailed how and why action taken by organisational leaders failed to have tangible impact. The inability to align organisational priorities and guidelines on the ground, as well as a failure to acknowledge the impact of structural incentives for organisations to compete at the expense of cooperation, in a context of limited financial and human resources, acted as barriers to more coordinated working. Within an environment of continuous reconfigurations, staff were often confused about the functions of new services and did not feel they had influence on change processes. Investing in a genuine bottom-up approach could ensure that the range of activities needed to generate system-wide cultural transformation reflect the capacity of the organisations and systems and address genuine local needs.

LIMITATIONS

The authors acknowledge several limitations of this study, including the focus on one geographical area, East London, and the timing of the evaluation, with several new interventions and programmes introduced more or less simultaneously. Some of the intermediate care services under evaluation were still at pilot stage and some teams were undergoing new reconfigurations, reflecting the fast-pace of change of the past decade. This created confusion at times, for instance when discussing specific roles and activities with participants. We tried to address some of these challenges by organising several workshops with different teams to co-interpret and discuss the findings.

Emergency admission risk stratification tools in UK primary care: a cross-sectional survey of availability and use

Background

Stratifying patient populations by risk of adverse events was believed to support preventive care for those identified, but recent evidence does not support this. Emergency admission risk stratification (EARS) tools have been widely promoted in UK policy and GP contracts.

Aim

To describe availability and use of EARS tools across the UK, and identify factors perceived to influence implementation.

Design and setting

Cross-sectional survey in UK.

Method

Online survey of 235 organisations responsible for UK primary care: 209 clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in England; 14 health boards in Scotland; seven health boards in Wales; and five local commissioning groups (LCGs) in Northern Ireland. Analysis results are presented using descriptive statistics for closed questions and by theme for open questions.

Results

Responses were analysed from 171 (72.8%) organisations, of which 148 (86.5%) reported that risk tools were available in their areas. Organisations identified 39 different EARS tools in use. Promotion by NHS commissioners, involvement of clinical leaders, and engagement of practice managers were identified as the most important factors in encouraging use of tools by general practices. High staff workloads and information governance were identified as important barriers. Tools were most frequently used to identify individual patients, but also for service planning. Nearly 40% of areas using EARS tools reported introducing or realigning services as a result, but relatively few reported use for service evaluation.

Conclusion

EARS tools are widely available across the UK, although there is variation by region. There remains a need to align policy and practice with research evidence.

Rethinking Integrated Care: A Systematic Hermeneutic Review of the Literature on Integrated Care Strategies and Concepts

Policy Points Integrated care is best understood as an emergent set of practices intrinsically shaped by contextual factors, and not as a single intervention to achieve predetermined outcomes. Policies to integrate care that facilitate person-centered, relationship-based care can potentially contribute to (but not determine) improved patient experiences. There can be an association between improved patient experiences and system benefits, but these outcomes of integrated care are of different orders and do not necessarily align. Policymakers should critically evaluate integrated care programs to identify and manage conflicts and tensions between a program's aims and the context in which it is being introduced.

CONTEXT

Integrated care is a broad concept, used to describe a connected set of clinical, organizational, and policy changes aimed at improving service efficiency, patient experience, and outcomes. Despite examples of successful integrated care systems, evidence for consistent and reproducible benefits remains elusive. We sought to inform policy and practice by conducting a systematic hermeneutic review of literature covering integrated care strategies and concepts.

METHODS

We used an emergent search strategy to identify 71 sources that considered what integrated care means and/or tested models of integrated care. Our analysis entailed (1) comparison of strategies and concepts of integrated care, (2) tracing common story lines across multiple sources, (3) developing a taxonomy of literature, and (4) generating a novel interpretation of the heterogeneous strategies and concepts of integrated care.

FINDINGS

We identified four perspectives on integrated care: patients' perspectives, organizational strategies and policies, conceptual models, and theoretical and critical analysis. We subdivided the strategies into four framings of how integrated care manifests and is understood to effect change. Common across empirical and conceptual work was a concern with unity in the face of fragmentation as well as the development and application of similar methods to achieve this unity. However, integrated care programs did not necessarily lead to the changes intended in experiences and outcomes. We attribute this gap between expectations and results, in part, to significant misalignment between the aspiration for unity underpinning conceptual models on the one hand and the multiplicity of practical application of strategies to integrate care on the other.

CONCLUSIONS

Those looking for universal answers to narrow questions about whether integrated care "works" are likely to remain disappointed. Models of integrated care need to be valued for their heuristic rather than predictive powers, and integration understood as emerging from particular as well as common contexts.

Why do evaluations of integrated care not produce the results we expect?

A number of evaluations of models of integrated care have not produced the expected result of reduced hospital admissions, and in some cases have even found people receiving integrated care services using hospitals more than matched controls. We tested three hypotheses for these surprising results with a group of 50 integrated care experts in a seminar: (1) problems with the model; (2) problems of implementation; and (3) problems of evaluation. Our group of experts did not rule out any of these hypotheses and came up with some advice as to manage these issues. For example, model designers should rigorously test the underlying logic; commissioners should seek out advice from experts and patients/professionals; and evaluators should choose outcomes wisely, use mixed methods approaches, and provide regular feedback loops to implementation sites. Evaluating integrated care is a skilled task that requires multiple approaches in terms of the design and implementation of the models. National research funders or other appropriate bodies might consider developing an advisory service to provide support to local systems planning evaluations.

What does integrated care mean from an older person's perspective? A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically map and synthesise the literature on older adults' perceptions and experiences of integrated care.

SETTING

Various healthcare settings, including primary care, hospitals, allied health practices and emergency departments.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged ≥60 years.

INTERVENTIONS

Integrated (or similarly coordinated) healthcare.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Using scoping review methodology, four electronic databases (EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses) and the grey literature (Open Grey and Google Scholar) were searched to identify studies reporting on older adults' experiences of integrated care. Studies reporting on empirical, interpretive and critical research using any type of methodology were included. Four independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction and analysis.

RESULTS

The initial search retrieved 436 articles, of which 30 were included in this review. Patients expressed a desire for continuity, both in terms of care relationships and management, seamless transitions between care services and/or settings, and coordinated care that delivers quick access, effective treatment, self-care support, respect for patient preferences, and involves carers and families.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants across the studies desired accessible, efficient and coordinated care that caters to their needs and preferences, while keeping in mind their rights and safety. This review highlights the salience of the relational, informational and organisational aspects of care from an older person's perspective. Findings are transferable and could be applied in various healthcare settings to derive patient-centred success measures that reflect the aspects of integrated care that are deemed important to older adults and their supporters.

Implementation of interventions to reduce preventable hospital admissions for cardiovascular or respiratory conditions: an evidence map and realist synthesis

Background

In 2012, a series of systematic reviews summarised the evidence regarding interventions to reduce preventable hospital admissions. Although intervention effects were dependent on context, the reviews revealed a consistent picture of reduction across different interventions targeting cardiovascular and respiratory conditions. The research reported here sought to provide an in-depth understanding of how interventions that have been shown to reduce admissions for these conditions may work, with a view to supporting their effective implementation in practice.

Objectives

To map the available evidence on interventions used in the UK NHS to reduce preventable admissions for cardiovascular and respiratory conditions and to conduct a realist synthesis of implementation evidence related to these interventions.

Methods

For the mapping review, six databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and October 2017. Studies were included if they were conducted in the UK, the USA, Canada, Australia or New Zealand; recruited adults with a cardiovascular or respiratory condition; and evaluated or described an intervention that could reduce preventable admissions or re-admissions. A descriptive summary of key characteristics of the included studies was produced. The studies included in the mapping review helped to inform the sampling frame for the subsequent realist synthesis. The wider evidence base was also engaged through supplementary searching. Data extraction forms were developed using appropriate frameworks (an implementation framework, an intervention template and a realist logic template). Following identification of initial programme theories (from the theoretical literature, empirical studies and insights from the patient and public involvement group), the review team extracted data into evidence tables. Programme theories were examined against the individual intervention types and collectively as a set. The resultant hypotheses functioned as synthesised statements around which an explanatory narrative referenced to the underpinning evidence base was developed. Additional searches for mid-range and overarching theories were carried out using Google Scholar (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA).

Results

A total of 569 publications were included in the mapping review. The largest group originated from the USA. The included studies from the UK showed a similar distribution to that of the map as a whole, but there was evidence of some country-specific features, such as the prominence of studies of telehealth. In the realist synthesis, it was found that interventions with strong evidence of effectiveness overall had not necessarily demonstrated effectiveness in UK settings. This could be a barrier to using these interventions in the NHS. Facilitation of the implementation of interventions was often not reported or inadequately reported. Many of the interventions were diverse in the ways in which they were delivered. There was also considerable overlap in the content of interventions. The role of specialist nurses was highlighted in several studies. The five programme theories identified were supported to varying degrees by empirical literature, but all provided valuable insights.

Limitations

The research was conducted by a small team; time and resources limited the team’s ability to consult with a full range of stakeholders.

Conclusions

Overall, implementation appears to be favoured by support for self-management by patients and their families/carers, support for services that signpost patients to consider alternatives to seeing their general practitioner when appropriate, recognition of possible reasons why patients seek admission, support for health-care professionals to diagnose and refer patients appropriately and support for workforce roles that promote continuity of care and co-ordination between services.

Future work

Research should focus on understanding discrepancies between national and international evidence and the transferability of findings between different contexts; the design and evaluation of implementation strategies informed by theories about how the intervention being implemented might work; and qualitative research on decision-making around hospital referrals and admissions.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Transforming community nursing services in the UK; lessons from a participatory evaluation of the implementation of a new community nursing model in East London based on the principles of the Dutch Buurtzorg model

Background

Buurtzorg, a model of community nursing conceived in the Netherlands, is widely cited as a promising and evidence-based approach to improving the delivery of integrated nursing and social care in community settings. The model is characterised by high levels of patient and staff satisfaction, professional autonomy exercised through self-managing nursing teams, client empowerment and holistic, patient centred care. This study aimed to examine the extent to which some of the principles of the Buurtzorg model could be adapted for community nursing in the United Kingdom.

Methods

A community nursing model based on the Buurtzorg approach was piloted from June 2017–August 2018 with a team of nurses co-located in a single general practice in the Borough of Tower Hamlets, East London, UK. The initiative was evaluated using a participatory methodology known as the Researcher-in-Residence model. Qualitative data were collected using participant observation of meetings and semi-structured interviews with nurse team members, senior managers, patients/carers and other local stakeholders such as General Practitioners (GP) and social workers. A thematic framework analysis of the data was carried out.

Results

Implementation of a community nursing model based on the Buurtzorg approach in East London had mixed success when assessed against its key principles. Patient experience of the service was positive because of the better access, improved continuity of care and longer appointment times in comparison with traditional community nursing provision. The model also provided important learning for developing service integration in community care, in particular, how to form effective collaborations across the care system with other health and social care professionals. However, some of the core features of the Buurtzorg model were difficult to put into practice in the National Health Service (NHS) because of significant cultural and regulatory differences between The Netherlands and the UK, especially the nurses’ ability to exercise professional autonomy.

Conclusions

Whilst many of the principles of the Buurtzorg model are applicable and transferable to the UK, in particular promoting independence among patients, improving patient experience and empowering frontline staff, the successful embedding of these aims as normalised ways of working will require a significant cultural shift at all levels of the NHS.

Area level impacts on emergency hospital admissions of the integrated care and support pioneer programme in England: difference-in-differences analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether any differential change in emergency admissions could be attributed to integrated care by comparing pioneer and non-pioneer populations from a pre-pioneer baseline period (April 2010 to March 2013) over two follow-up periods: to 2014/2015 and to 2015/2016.

DESIGN

Difference-in-differences analysis of emergency hospital admissions from English Hospital Episode Statistics.

SETTING

Local authorities in England classified as either pioneer or non-pioneer.

PARTICIPANTS

Emergency admissions to all NHS hospitals in England with local authority determined by area of residence of the patient.

INTERVENTION

Wave 1 of the integrated care and support pioneer programme announced in November 2013.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Change in hospital emergency admissions.

RESULTS

The increase in the pioneer emergency admission rate from baseline to 2014/2015 was smaller at 1.93% and significantly different from that of the non-pioneers at 4.84% (p=0.0379). The increase in the pioneer emergency admission rate from baseline to 2015/2016 was again smaller than for the non-pioneers but the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.1879).

CONCLUSIONS

It is ambitious to expect unequivocal changes in a high level and indirect indicator of health and social care integration such as emergency hospital admissions to arise as a result of the changes in local health and social care provision across organisations brought about by the pioneers in their early years. We should treat any sign that the pioneers have had such an impact with caution. Nevertheless, there does seem to be an indication from the current analysis that there were some changes in hospital use associated with the first year of pioneer status that are worthy of further exploration.

The implications of high bed occupancy rates on readmission rates in England: A longitudinal study

Hospital bed occupancy rates in the English National Health Service have risen to levels considered clinically unsafe. This study assesses the association of increased bed occupancy with changes in the percentage of overnight patients discharged from hospital on a given day, and their subsequent 30-day readmission rate. Longitudinal panel data methods are used to analyse secondary care records (n = 4,193,590) for 136 non-specialist Trusts between April 2014 and February 2016. The average bed occupancy rate across the study period was 90.4%. A 1% increase in bed occupancy was associated with a 0.49% rise in the discharge rate, and a 0.011% increase in the 30-day readmission rate for discharged patients. These associations became more pronounced once bed occupancy exceeded 95%. When bed occupancy rates were high, hospitals discharged a greater proportion of their patients. Those were mostly younger and less clinically complex, suggesting that hospitals are successfully prioritising early discharge amongst least vulnerable patients. However, while increased bed occupancy was not associated with a substantial increase in overall 30-day readmission rates, the relationship was more pronounced in older and sicker patients, indicating possible links with short-fallings in discharge processes.

Effect of an integrated care pathway on use of primary and secondary healthcare by patients at high risk of emergency inpatient admission: a matched control cohort study in Tower Hamlets

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of an integrated care pathway on the use of primary and secondary healthcare by patients at high risk of emergency inpatient admission.

DESIGN

Observational study of a real-life deployment of integrated care, using patient-level administrative data. Regression analysis was used to compare integrated care patients with matched controls.

SETTING

A deprived, inner city London borough (Tower Hamlets).

PARTICIPANTS

1720 patients aged 50+ years registered with a general practitioner in Tower Hamlets and at high risk of emergency inpatient admission enrolled onto integrated care during 2014. These patients were matched to control patients, also selected from Tower Hamlets, with respect to demographics, diagnoses of health conditions, previous hospital use and risk score.

INTERVENTIONS

Enrolled patients were eligible for a range of interventions, such as case management, support with self-care and enhanced care coordination. Control patients received usual care.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ENDPOINTS

Number of emergency inpatient admissions in the year after enrolment onto integrated care. Secondary endpoints included numbers of elective inpatient admissions, inpatient bed days, accident and emergency attendances, outpatient attendances and general practitioner contacts in the year after enrolment.

RESULTS

There was no evidence that the integrated care pathway reduced patients' healthcare utilisation in the first year post-enrolment. Matched controls and integrated care patients were similar at baseline. Following enrolment, integrated care patients were more likely than matched controls to experience elective inpatient admissions (adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR)=1.27, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.49, p=0.004). They were also more likely to experience general practitioner contacts (adjusted IRR=1.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.16, p<0.001), but other endpoints were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The integrated care pathway was not associated with a reduction in healthcare utilisation in the first year, but appeared to have increased elective inpatient admissions and general practitioner workload.

Community care for severely frail older people: Developing explanations of how, why and for whom it works

BACKGROUND

A Community Wellness Team was implemented in North East England in 2014, in line with national policy directives to support frail older people in the community. The service provides a comprehensive and integrated care package, which aims to reduce avoidable admissions, inappropriate service use and enable patients to stay at home.

DESIGN

A realist design combining a review of the literature and primary data collection from service providers and patients was used to develop programme theories explaining the links between the Team interventions and expected outcomes.

RESULTS

Five programme theories were developed, detailing: trust development and relationship building; risk minimisation in the home environment; advice on self-management; referral to preventative services; and coordination of services.

DISCUSSION

The programme theories explain the role and impact of the Community Wellness Team. These programme theories are interrelated and impact one another; a hypothesised progression of programme theories indicating how the Community Wellness Team "works" is discussed. Of particular importance was the comprehensive initial assessment, which leads to the alteration of the social and physical environment within which older people live.

CONCLUSION

Severely frail older people present cases that are complex socially, medically, financially and environmentally. In order to meet these needs, the Team coordinators are adopting a complex and flexible person-centred approach.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study paves the way for further research into the care networks surrounding severely frail older people living in the community, and how they can most effectively be implemented.

Experiences of integrated care: reflections on tensions of size, scale and perspective between ethnography and evaluation

An in-depth case study of integrated health and social care provides the empirical basis for this exploration of tensions between ethnography and evaluation. The case study, developed from a two year period of fieldwork, is based on ethnographic data of individuals' experiences of living with multiple long-term conditions, their experiences of integrated care, and integrated care commissioning practices. Narrative and phenomenological analysis show how temporal aspects of ethnographic fieldwork contribute to producing knowledge of patients' experiences. However, tensions emerge when attempting to bring learning from these experiences into discussions about evaluations of services. Data generated from fieldwork are seen as both too 'big', in terms of quantity of details, and too 'small', in terms of generalisability. Scale is also of concern, as tensions between ethnography and evaluation play out in questions of relevance. Ethnography foregrounds embodied, day-to-day lived experience, bringing the minutiae of daily life into sharp focus whereas evaluators need a wider angle to foreground larger objects of interest; organisations, budgets, services. A further source of tension between ethnography and evaluation emerges in defining interventions as distinct from context, when the conceptual boundary required to distinguish the shape of the intervention within a social world blurs and dissolves under the close gaze of an immersed ethnographer, problematizing attempts to inform causation. Concerns are raised that without greater dialogue about the nature of knowledge produced by patients' experiences, these experiences are at risk of being marginalised and de-centred.

Self-management capability in patients with long-term conditions is associated with reduced healthcare utilisation across a whole health economy: cross-sectional analysis of electronic health records

Objective

To quantify the association between patient self-management capability measured using the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) and healthcare utilisation across a whole health economy.

Results

12 270 PAM questionnaires were returned from 9348 patients. In the adjusted analyses, compared with the least activated group, highly activated patients (level 4) had the lowest rate of contact with a general practitioner (rate ratio: 0.82, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.86), emergency department attendances (rate ratio: 0.68, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.78), emergency hospital admissions (rate ratio: 0.62, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.75) and outpatient attendances (rate ratio: 0.81, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.88). These patients also had the lowest relative rate (compared with the least activated) of ‘did not attends’ at the general practitioner (rate ratio: 0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.87), ‘did not attends’ at hospital outpatient appointments (rate ratio: 0.72, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.86) and self-referred attendance at emergency departments for conditions classified as minor severity (rate ratio: 0.67, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.82), a significantly shorter average length of stay for overnight elective admissions (rate ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.94), and a lower likelihood of 30- day emergency readmission (rate ratio: 0.68, 95%  CI 0.39 to 1.17), though this did not reach significance.

Conclusions

Self-management capability is associated with lower healthcare utilisation and less wasteful use across primary and secondary care.

Understanding new models of integrated care in developed countries: a systematic review

Background

The NHS has been challenged to adopt new integrated models of service delivery that are tailored to local populations. Evidence from the international literature is needed to support the development and implementation of these new models of care.

Objectives

The study aimed to carry out a systematic review of international evidence to enhance understanding of the mechanisms whereby new models of service delivery have an impact on health-care outcomes.

Design

The study combined rigorous and systematic methods for identification of literature, together with innovative methods for synthesis and presentation of findings.

Setting

Any setting.

Participants

Patients receiving a health-care service and/or staff delivering services.

Interventions

Changes to service delivery that increase integration and co-ordination of health and health-related services.

Main outcome measures

Outcomes related to the delivery of services, including the views and perceptions of patients/service users and staff.

Study design

Empirical work of a quantitative or qualitative design.

Data sources

We searched electronic databases (between October 2016 and March 2017) for research published from 2006 onwards in databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index and The Cochrane Library. We also searched relevant websites, screened reference lists and citation searched on a previous review.

Review methods

The identified evidence was synthesised in three ways. First, data from included studies were used to develop an evidence-based logic model, and a narrative summary reports the elements of the pathway. Second, we examined the strength of evidence underpinning reported outcomes and impacts using a comparative four-item rating system. Third, we developed an applicability framework to further scrutinise and characterise the evidence.

Results

We included 267 studies in the review. The findings detail the complex pathway from new models to impacts, with evidence regarding elements of new models of integrated care, targets for change, process change, influencing factors, service-level outcomes and system-wide impacts. A number of positive outcomes were reported in the literature, with stronger evidence of perceived increased patient satisfaction and improved quality of care and access to care. There was stronger UK-only evidence of reduced outpatient appointments and waiting times. Evidence was inconsistent regarding other outcomes and system-wide impacts such as levels of activity and costs. There was an indication that new models have particular potential with patients who have complex needs.

Limitations

Defining new models of integrated care is challenging, and there is the potential that our study excluded potentially relevant literature. The review was extensive, with diverse study populations and interventions that precluded the statistical summary of effectiveness.

Conclusions

There is stronger evidence that new models of integrated care may enhance patient satisfaction and perceived quality and increase access; however, the evidence regarding other outcomes is unclear. The study recommends factors to be considered during the implementation of new models.

Future work

Links between elements of new models and outcomes require further study, together with research in a wider variety of populations.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD37725.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

The effects of integrated care: a systematic review of UK and international evidence

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems around the world have been responding to the demand for better integrated models of service delivery. However, there is a need for further clarity regarding the effects of these new models of integration, and exploration regarding whether models introduced in other care systems may achieve similar outcomes in a UK national health service context.

METHODS

The study aimed to carry out a systematic review of the effects of integration or co-ordination between healthcare services, or between health and social care on service delivery outcomes including effectiveness, efficiency and quality of care. Electronic databases including MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; CINAHL; Science and Social Science Citation Indices; and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant literature published between 2006 to March 2017. Online sources were searched for UK grey literature, and citation searching, and manual reference list screening were also carried out. Quantitative primary studies and systematic reviews, reporting actual or perceived effects on service delivery following the introduction of models of integration or co-ordination, in healthcare or health and social care settings in developed countries were eligible for inclusion. Strength of evidence for each outcome reported was analysed and synthesised using a four point comparative rating system of stronger, weaker, inconsistent or limited evidence.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty seven studies were eligible for inclusion. Analysis indicated evidence of perceived improved quality of care, evidence of increased patient satisfaction, and evidence of improved access to care. Evidence was rated as either inconsistent or limited regarding all other outcomes reported, including system-wide impacts on primary care, secondary care, and health care costs. There were limited differences between outcomes reported by UK and international studies, and overall the literature had a limited consideration of effects on service users.

CONCLUSIONS

Models of integrated care may enhance patient satisfaction, increase perceived quality of care, and enable access to services, although the evidence for other outcomes including service costs remains unclear. Indications of improved access may have important implications for services struggling to cope with increasing demand.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero registration number: 42016037725 .

Integrated Care Approaches Used for Transitions from Hospital to Community Care: A Scoping Review

ABSTRACTIntegrated care is a promising approach for improving care transitions for older adults, but this concept is inconsistently defined and applied. This scoping review describes the size and nature of literature on integrated care initiatives for transitions from hospital to community care for older adults (aged 65 and older) and how this literature conceptualizes integrated care. A systematic search of literature from the past 10 years yielded 899 documents that were screened for inclusion by two reviewers. Of the 48 included documents, there were 26 journal articles and 22 grey literature documents. Analysis included descriptive statistics and a content analysis approach to summarize features of the integrated care initiatives. Results suggest that clinical and service delivery integration is being targeted rather than integration of funding, administration, and/or organization. To promote international comparison of integrated care initiatives aiming to improve care transitions, detailed descriptions of organizational context are also needed.

Does the chronic care model meet the emerging needs of people living with multimorbidity? A systematic review and thematic synthesis

BACKGROUND

The Chronic Care Model (CCM) emerged in the 1990s as an approach to re-organize primary care and implement critical elements that enable it to proactively attend to patients with chronic conditions. The chronic care landscape has evolved further, as most patients now present with multiple chronic conditions and increasing psychosocial complexity. These patients face accumulating and overwhelming complexity resulting from the sum of uncoordinated responses to each of their problems. Minimally Disruptive Medicine (MDM) was proposed to respond to this challenge, aiming at improving outcomes that matter to patients with the smallest burden of treatment. We sought to critically appraise the extent to which MDM constructs (e.g., reducing patient work, improving patients' capacity) have been adopted within CCM implementations.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and qualitative thematic synthesis of reports of CCM implementations published from 2011-2016.

RESULTS

CCM implementations were mostly aligned with the healthcare system's goals, condition-specific, and targeted disease-specific outcomes or healthcare utilization. No CCM implementation addressed patient work. Few reduced treatment workload without adding additional tasks. Implementations supported patient capacity by offering information, but rarely offered practical resources (e.g., financial assistance, transportation), helped patients reframe their biography with chronic illness, or assisted them in engaging with a supportive social network. Few implementations aimed at improving functional status or quality of life, and only one-third of studies were targeted for patients of low socioeconomic status.

CONCLUSION

MDM provides a lens to operationalize how to care for patients with multiple chronic conditions, but its constructs remain mostly absent from how implementations of the CCM are currently reported. Improvements to the primary care of patients with multimorbidity may benefit from the application of MDM, and the current CCM implementations that do apply MDM constructs should be considered exemplars for future implementation work.

Predictive risk stratification model: a randomised stepped-wedge trial in primary care (PRISMATIC)

Background

With a higher proportion of older people in the UK population, new approaches are needed to reduce emergency hospital admissions, thereby shifting care delivery out of hospital when possible and safe.

Study aim

To evaluate the introduction of predictive risk stratification in primary care.

Objectives

To (1) measure the effects on service usage, particularly emergency admissions to hospital; (2) assess the effects of the Predictive RIsk Stratification Model (PRISM) on quality of life and satisfaction; (3) assess the technical performance of PRISM; (4) estimate the costs of PRISM implementation and its effects; and (5) describe the processes of change associated with PRISM.

Design

Randomised stepped-wedge trial with economic and qualitative components.

Setting

Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board, south Wales.

Participants

Patients registered with 32 participating general practices.

Intervention

PRISM software, which stratifies patients into four (emergency admission) risk groups; practice-based training; and clinical support.

Main outcome measures

Primary outcome – emergency hospital admissions. Secondary outcomes – emergency department (ED) and outpatient attendances, general practitioner (GP) activity, time in hospital, quality of life, satisfaction and costs.

Data sources

Routine anonymised linked health service use data, self-completed questionnaires and staff focus groups and interviews.

Results

Across 230,099 participants, PRISM implementation led to increased emergency admissions to hospital [ΔL = 0.011, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.010 to 0.013], ED attendances (ΔL = 0.030, 95% CI 0.028 to 0.032), GP event-days (ΔL = 0.011, 95% CI 0.007 to 0.014), outpatient visits (ΔL = 0.055, 95% CI 0.051 to 0.058) and time spent in hospital (ΔL = 0.029, 95% CI 0.026 to 0.031). Quality-of-life scores related to mental health were similar between phases (Δ = –0.720, 95% CI –1.469 to 0.030); physical health scores improved in the intervention phase (Δ = 1.465, 95% CI 0.774 to 2.157); and satisfaction levels were lower (Δ = –0.074, 95% CI – 0.133 to –0.015). PRISM implementation cost £0.12 per patient per year and costs of health-care use per patient were higher in the intervention phase (Δ = £76, 95% CI £46 to £106). There was no evidence of any significant difference in deaths between phases (9.58 per 1000 patients per year in the control phase and 9.25 per 1000 patients per year in the intervention phase). PRISM showed good general technical performance, comparable with existing risk prediction tools (c-statistic of 0.749). Qualitative data showed low use by GPs and practice staff, although they all reported using PRISM to generate lists of patients to target for prioritised care to meet Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) targets.

Limitations

In Wales during the study period, QOF targets were introduced into general practice to encourage targeting care to those at highest risk of emergency admission to hospital. Within this dynamic context, we therefore evaluated the combined effects of PRISM and this contemporaneous policy initiative.

Conclusions

Introduction of PRISM increased emergency episodes, hospitalisation and costs across, and within, risk levels without clear evidence of benefits to patients.

Future research

(1) Evaluation of targeting of different services to different levels of risk; (2) investigation of effects on vulnerable populations and health inequalities; (3) secondary analysis of the Predictive Risk Stratification: A Trial in Chronic Conditions Management data set by health condition type; and (4) acceptability of predictive risk stratification to patients and practitioners.

Trial and study registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN55538212 and PROSPERO CRD42015016874.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services Delivery and Research programme.

Relevant models and elements of integrated care for multi-morbidity: Results of a scoping review

BACKGROUND

In order to provide adequate care for the growing group of persons with multi-morbidity, innovative integrated care programmes are appearing. The aims of the current scoping review were to i) identify relevant models and elements of integrated care for multi-morbidity and ii) to subsequently identify which of these models and elements are applied in integrated care programmes for multi-morbidity.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted in the following scientific databases: Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, PsycInfo, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Web of Science. A search strategy encompassing a) models, elements and programmes, b) integrated care, and c) multi-morbidity was used to identify both models and elements (aim 1) and implemented programmes of integrated care for multi-morbidity (aim 2). Data extraction was done by two independent reviewers. Besides general information on publications (e.g. publication year, geographical region, study design, and target group), data was extracted on models and elements that publications refer to, as well as which models and elements are applied in recently implemented programmes in the EU and US.

RESULTS

In the review 11,641 articles were identified. After title and abstract screening, 272 articles remained. Full text screening resulted in the inclusion of 92 articles on models and elements, and 50 articles on programmes, of which 16 were unique programmes in the EU (n=11) and US (n=5). Wagner's Chronic Care Model (CCM) and the Guided Care Model (GCM) were most often referred to (CCM n=31; GCM n=6); the majority of the other models found were only referred to once (aim 1). Both the CCM and GCM focus on integrated care in general and do not explicitly focus on multi-morbidity. Identified elements of integrated care were clustered according to the WHO health system building blocks. Most elements pertained to 'service delivery'. Across all components, the five elements referred to most often are person-centred care, holistic or needs assessment, integration and coordination of care services and/or professionals, collaboration, and self-management (aim 1). Most (n=10) of the 16 identified implemented programmes for multi-morbidity referred to the CCM (aim 2). Of all identified programmes, the elements most often included were self-management, comprehensive assessment, interdisciplinary care or collaboration, person-centred care and electronic information system (aim 2).

CONCLUSION

Most models and elements found in the literature focus on integrated care in general and do not explicitly focus on multi-morbidity. In line with this, most programmes identified in the literature build on the CCM. A comprehensive framework that better accounts for the complexities resulting from multi-morbidity is needed.

What works in implementation of integrated care programs for older adults with complex needs? A realist review

PURPOSE

A realist review of the evaluative evidence was conducted on integrated care (IC) programs for older adults to identify key processes that lead to the success or failure of these programs in achieving outcomes such as reduced healthcare utilization, improved patient health, and improved patient and caregiver experience.

DATA SOURCES

International academic literature was searched in 12 indexed, electronic databases and gray literature through internet searches, to identify evaluative studies.

STUDY SELECTION

Inclusion criteria included evaluative literature on integrated, long-stay health and social care programs, published between January 1980 and July 2015, in English.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted on the study purpose, period, setting, design, population, sample size, outcomes, and study results, as well as explanations of mechanisms and contextual factors influencing outcomes.

RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 65 articles, representing 28 IC programs, were included in the review. Two context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOcs) were identified: (i) trusting multidisciplinary team relationships and (ii) provider commitment to and understanding of the model. Contextual factors such as strong leadership that sets clear goals and establishes an organizational culture in support of the program, along with joint governance structures, supported team collaboration and subsequent successful implementation. Furthermore, time to build an infrastructure to implement and flexibility in implementation, emerged as key processes instrumental to success of these programs.

CONCLUSIONS

This review included a wide range of international evidence, and identified key processes for successful implementation of IC programs that should be considered by program planners, leaders and evaluators.

Enhancing risk stratification for use in integrated care: a cluster analysis of high-risk patients in a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To show how segmentation can enhance risk stratification tools for integrated care, by providing insight into different care usage patterns within the high-risk population.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study. A risk score was calculated for each person using a logistic regression, which was then used to select the top 5% high-risk individuals. This population was segmented based on the usage of different care settings using a k-means cluster analysis. Data from 2008 to 2011 were used to create the risk score and segments, while 2012 data were used to understand the predictive abilities of the models.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Data were collected from administrative data sets covering primary and secondary care for a random sample of 300 000 English patients.

MAIN MEASURES

The high-risk population was segmented based on their usage of 4 different care settings: emergency acute care, elective acute care, outpatient care and GP care.

RESULTS

While the risk strata predicted care usage at a high level, within the high-risk population, usage varied significantly. 4 different groups of high-risk patients could be identified. These 4 segments had distinct usage patterns across care settings, reflecting different levels and types of care needs. The 2008-2011 usage patterns of the 4 segments were consistent with the 2012 patterns.

DISCUSSION

Cluster analyses revealed that the high-risk population is not homogeneous, as there exist 4 groups of patients with different needs across the care continuum. Since the patterns were predictive of future care use, they can be used to develop integrated care programmes tailored to these different groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Usage-based segmentation augments risk stratification by identifying patient groups with different care needs, around which integrated care programmes can be designed.

What can a participatory approach to evaluation contribute to the field of integrated care?

Better integration of care within the health sector and between health and social care is seen in many countries as an essential way of addressing the enduring problems of dwindling resources, changing demographics and unacceptable variation in quality of care. Current research evidence about the effectiveness of integration efforts supports neither the enthusiasm of those promoting and designing integrated care programmes nor the growing efforts of practitioners attempting to integrate care on the ground. In this paper we present a methodological approach, based on the principles of participatory research, that attempts to address this challenge. Participatory approaches are characterised by a desire to use social science methods to solve practical problems and a commitment on the part of researchers to substantive and sustained collaboration with relevant stakeholders. We describe how we applied an emerging practical model of participatory research, the researcher-in-residence model, to evaluate a large-scale integrated care programme in the UK. We propose that the approach added value to the programme in a number of ways: by engaging stakeholders in using established evidence and with the benefits of rigorously evaluating their work, by providing insights for local stakeholders that they were either not familiar with or had not fully considered in relation to the development and implementation of the programme and by challenging established mindsets and norms. While there is still much to learn about the benefits and challenges of applying participatory approaches in the health sector, we demonstrate how using such approaches have the potential to help practitioners integrate care more effectively in their daily practice and help progress the academic study of integrated care.

Does integrated care reduce hospital activity for patients with chronic diseases? An umbrella review of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVE

To summarise the evidence regarding the effectiveness of integrated care interventions in reducing hospital activity.

DESIGN

Umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

SETTING

Interventions must have delivered care crossing the boundary between at least two health and/or social care settings.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients with one or more chronic diseases.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, ASSIA, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Cochrane Library (HTA database, DARE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), EPPI-Centre, TRIP, HEED, manual screening of references.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Any measure of hospital admission or readmission, length of stay (LoS), accident and emergency use, healthcare costs.

RESULTS

50 reviews were included. Interventions focused on case management (n=8), chronic care model (CCM) (n=9), discharge management (n=15), complex interventions (n=3), multidisciplinary teams (MDT) (n=10) and self-management (n=5). 29 reviews reported statistically significant improvements in at least one outcome. 11/21 reviews reported significantly reduced emergency admissions (15-50%); 11/24 showed significant reductions in all-cause (10-30%) or condition-specific (15-50%) readmissions; 9/16 reported LoS reductions of 1-7 days and 4/9 showed significantly lower A&E use (30-40%). 10/25 reviews reported significant cost reductions but provided little robust evidence. Effective interventions included discharge management with postdischarge support, MDT care with teams that include condition-specific expertise, specialist nurses and/or pharmacists and self-management as an adjunct to broader interventions. Interventions were most effective when targeting single conditions such as heart failure, and when care was provided in patients' homes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although all outcomes showed some significant reductions, and a number of potentially effective interventions were found, interventions rarely demonstrated unequivocally positive effects. Despite the centrality of integrated care to current policy, questions remain about whether the magnitude of potentially achievable gains is enough to satisfy national targets for reductions in hospital activity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42015016458.

Developing a framework for gathering and using service user experiences to improve integrated health and social care: the SUFFICE framework

BACKGROUND

More people than ever receive care and support from health and social care services. Initiatives to integrate the work of health and social care staff have increased rapidly across the UK but relatively little has been done to chart and improve their impact on service users. Our aim was to develop a framework for gathering and using service user feedback to improve integrated health and social care in one locality in the North of England.

METHODS

We used published literature and interviews with health and social care managers to determine the expected service user experiences of local community-based integrated teams and the ways in which team members were expected to work together. We used the results to devise qualitative data collection and analysis tools for gathering and analyzing service user feedback. We used developmental evaluation and service improvement methodologies to devise a procedure for developing service improvement plans.

FINDINGS

We identified six expected service user experiences of integrated care and 15 activities that health and social care teams were expected to undertake. We used these to develop logic models and tools for collecting and analysing service user experiences. These include a narrative interview schedule, a plan for analyzing data, and a method for synthesizing the results into a composite 'story'. We devised a structured service improvement procedure which involves teams of health and social care staff listening to a composite service user story, identifying how their actions as a team may have contributed to the story and developing a service improvement plan.

CONCLUSIONS

This framework aims to put service user experiences at the heart of efforts to improve integration. It has been developed in collaboration with National Health Service (NHS) and Social Care managers. We expect it to be useful for evaluating and improving integrated care initiatives elsewhere.

Effectiveness of multidisciplinary team case management: difference-in-differences analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate a multidisciplinary team (MDT) case management intervention, at the individual (direct effects of intervention) and practice levels (potential spillover effects).

DESIGN

Difference-in-differences design with multiple intervention start dates, analysing hospital admissions data. In secondary analyses, we stratified individual-level results by risk score.

SETTING

Single clinical commissioning group (CCG) in the UK's National Health Service (NHS).

PARTICIPANTS

At the individual level, we matched 2049 intervention patients using propensity scoring one-to-one with control patients. At the practice level, 30 practices were compared using a natural experiment through staged implementation.

INTERVENTION

Practice Integrated Care Teams (PICTs), using MDT case management of high-risk patients together with a summary record of care versus usual care.

DIRECT AND INDIRECT OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary measures of intervention effects were accident and emergency (A&E) visits; inpatient non-elective stays, 30-day re-admissions; inpatient elective stays; outpatient visits; and admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. Secondary measures included inpatient length of stay; total cost of secondary care services; and patient satisfaction (at the practice level only).

RESULTS

At the individual level, we found slight, clinically trivial increases in inpatient non-elective admissions (+0.01 admissions per patient per month; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.01. Effect size (ES): 0.02) and 30-day re-admissions (+0.00; 0.00 to 0.01. ES: 0.03). We found no indication that highest risk patients benefitted more from the intervention. At the practice level, we found a small decrease in inpatient non-elective admissions (-0.63 admissions per 1000 patients per month; -1.17 to -0.09. ES: -0.24). However, this result did not withstand a robustness check; the estimate may have absorbed some differences in underlying practice trends.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention does not meet its primary aim, and the clinical significance and cost-effectiveness of these small practice-level effects is debatable. There is an ongoing need to develop effective ways to reduce unnecessary attendances in secondary care for the high-risk population.

Effect of Named, Accountable GPs on Continuity of Care: Protocol for a Regression Discontinuity Study of a National Policy Change

Introduction:

Increasing continuity of care has been identified as a strategy to improve patient outcomes, but previous studies of integrated care have tended to focus on pilot areas, which limit their generalisability and the ability to determine in which contexts integrated care was most successful.

Objective:

This study protocol describes a quantitative evaluation of a reform in England that introduced named, accountable general practitioners for all National Health Service (NHS) patients aged 75 years or over. The national contract for general practice services required that named general practitioners offer longitudinal continuity of care within the general practice and be accountable for coordinating care to meet the patient’s healthcare needs.

Methods:

This study will apply a regression discontinuity design to pseudonymised electronic medical records from a sample of general practices in England. We will compare outcomes for patients aged just below and above the age of 75 to estimate the effect of named general practitioners and relate these estimated treatment effects to the characteristics of general practices. Outcomes will include a metric relating to continuity of care, namely the Usual Provider of Care Index, and numbers of general practitioner contacts, referrals to specialist care and diagnostic tests.

Discussion:

The study illustrates an approach to evaluate national changes aimed at more integrated care using electronic records, which will complement in-depth examination in pilot sites.

Cost-utility analysis of case management for frail older people: effects of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effects of a case management intervention for frail older people (aged 65+ years) by cost and utility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and fifty-three frail older people living at home were randomly assigned to either an intervention (n = 80) or a control group (n = 73). The 1-year intervention was carried out by nurses and physiotherapists working as case managers, who undertook home visits at least once a month. Differences in costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) based on the health-related quality-of-life instruments EQ-5D and EQ-VAS, and also the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were investigated. All analyses used the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the intervention group and control group for total cost, EQ-5D-based QALY or EQ-VAS-based QALY for the 1-year study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was not conducted because no significant differences were found for either EQ-5D- or EQ-VAS-based QALY, or costs. However, the intervention group had significantly lower levels of informal care and help with instrumental activities of daily living both as costs (<euro>3,927 vs. <euro>6,550, p = 0.037) and provided hours (200 vs. 333 hours per year, p = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention was cost neutral and does not seem to have affected health-related quality of life for the 1-year study, which may be because the follow-up period was too short. The intervention seems to have reduced hours and cost of informal care and help required with instrumental activities of daily living. This suggests that the intervention provides relief to informal caregivers.

Protocol for a process-oriented qualitative evaluation of the Waltham Forest and East London Collaborative (WELC) integrated care pioneer programme using the Researcher-in-Residence model

INTRODUCTION

The integration of health and social care in England is widely accepted as the answer to fragmentation, financial concerns and system inefficiencies, in the context of growing and ageing populations with increasingly complex needs. Despite an expanding body of literature, there is little evidence yet to suggest that integrated care can achieve the benefits that its advocates claim for it. Researchers have often adopted rationalist and technocratic approaches to evaluation, treating integration as an intervention rather than a process. Results have usually been of limited use to practitioners responsible for health and social care integration. There is, therefore, a need to broaden the evidence base, exploring not only what works but also how integrated care can most successfully be implemented and delivered. For this reason, we are carrying out a formative evaluation of the Waltham Forest and East London Collaborative (WELC) integrated care pioneer programme. Our expectation is that this will add value to the literature by focusing on the processes by which the vision and objectives of integrated care are translated through phases of development, implementation and delivery from a central to a local perspective, and from a strategic to an operational perspective.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The qualitative and process-oriented evaluation uses an innovative participative approach-the Researcher-in-Residence model. The evaluation is underpinned by a critical ontology, an interpretive epistemology and a critical discourse analysis methodology. Data will be generated using interviews, observations and documentary gathering.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Emerging findings will be interpreted and disseminated collaboratively with stakeholders, to enable the research to influence and optimise the effective implementation of integrated care across WELC. Presentations and publications will ensure that learning is shared as widely as possible. The study has received ethical approval from University College London's Research Ethics Committee and has all appropriate NHS governance clearances.

Integration and continuity of primary care: polyclinics and alternatives – a patient-centred analysis of how organisation constrains care co-ordination

Background

An ageing population, the increasing specialisation of clinical services and diverse health-care provider ownership make the co-ordination and continuity of complex care increasingly problematic. The way in which the provision of complex health care is co-ordinated produces – or fails to produce – six forms of continuity of care (cross-sectional, longitudinal, flexible, access, informational and relational). Care co-ordination is accomplished by a combination of activities by patients themselves; provider organisations; care networks co-ordinating the separate provider organisations; and overall health-system governance. This research examines how far organisational integration might promote care co-ordination at the clinical level.

Objectives

To examine (1) what differences the organisational integration of primary care makes, compared with network governance, to horizontal and vertical co-ordination of care; (2) what difference provider ownership (corporate, partnership, public) makes; (3) how much scope either structure allows for managerial discretion and ‘performance’; (4) differences between networked and hierarchical governance regarding the continuity and integration of primary care; and (5) the implications of the above for managerial practice in primary care.

Methods

Multiple-methods design combining (1) the assembly of an analytic framework by non-systematic review; (2) a framework analysis of patients’ experiences of the continuities of care; (3) a systematic comparison of organisational case studies made in the same study sites; (4) a cross-country comparison of care co-ordination mechanisms found in our NHS study sites with those in publicly owned and managed Swedish polyclinics; and (5) the analysis and synthesis of data using an ‘inside-out’ analytic strategy. Study sites included professional partnership, corporate and publicly owned and managed primary care providers, and different configurations of organisational integration or separation of community health services, mental health services, social services and acute inpatient care.

Results

Starting from data about patients’ experiences of the co-ordination or under-co-ordination of care, we identified five care co-ordination mechanisms present in both the integrated organisations and the care networks; four main obstacles to care co-ordination within the integrated organisations, of which two were also present in the care networks; seven main obstacles to care co-ordination that were specific to the care networks; and nine care co-ordination mechanisms present in the integrated organisations. Taking everything into consideration, integrated organisations appeared more favourable to producing continuities of care than did care networks. Network structures demonstrated more flexibility in adding services for small care groups temporarily, but the expansion of integrated organisations had advantages when adding new services on a longer term and a larger scale. Ownership differences affected the range of services to which patients had direct access; primary care doctors’ managerial responsibilities (relevant to care co-ordination because of their impact on general practitioner workload); and the scope for doctors to develop special interests. We found little difference between integrated organisations and care networks in terms of managerial discretion and performance.

Conclusions

On balance, an integrated organisation seems more likely to favour the development of care co-ordination and, therefore, continuities of care than a system of care networks. At least four different variants of ownership and management of organisationally integrated primary care providers are practicable in NHS-like settings. Future research is therefore required, above all to evaluate comparatively the different techniques for coordinating patient discharge across the triple interface between hospitals, general practices and community health services; and to discover what effects increasing the scale and scope of general practice activities will have on continuity of care.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

The effectiveness of interventions to achieve co-ordinated multidisciplinary care and reduce hospital use for people with chronic diseases: study protocol for a systematic review of reviews

BACKGROUND

The burden of chronic disease on patients and the health service is growing. Current health policy emphasises the need for services which provide integrated and co-ordinated care for patients with chronic diseases, but there is uncertainty about which integrated care interventions and service models may be most effective. This review of reviews aims to synthesise the available evidence about the effectiveness of such interventions and service models in terms of patient experience of health and social care, the use of hospital and other health resources, and the associated costs.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will search MEDLINE, Embase, ASSIA, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Cochrane Library (including HTA Database, DARE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), EPPI-Centre, TRIP, and Health Economic Evaluations databases for English language systematic reviews and meta-analyses published since 2000 that have evaluated the effectiveness of integrated care interventions for patients with chronic diseases. Interventions must deliver care that crosses the boundary between at least two health and/or social care settings. Outcomes of interest are healthcare resource use, patient quality of life/satisfaction, costs, and care co-ordination. Data from eligible reviews will be extracted by two independent reviewers and will include study details, the design, delivery and co-ordination of interventions, and methodological quality. Evidence synthesis will focus on a narrative overview of interventions and their effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

The review aims to summarise the evidence base about the effectiveness of integrated care interventions and service models and describe how interventions have been organised, co-ordinated, and delivered. The findings have the potential to impact on the commissioning of health and social care services in the UK which aim to provide integrated and co-ordinated care for patients with chronic disease and multimorbidity.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42015016458 .

A comparison of alternative strategies for choosing control populations in observational studies

Various approaches have been used to select control groups in observational studies: (1) from within the intervention area; (2) from a convenience sample, or randomly chosen areas; (3) from areas matched on area-level characteristics; and (4) nationally. The consequences of the decision are rarely assessed but, as we show, it can have complex impacts on confounding at both the area and individual levels. We began by reanalyzing data collected for an evaluation of a rapid response service on rates of unplanned hospital admission. Balance on observed individual-level variables was better with external than local controls, after matching. Further, when important prognostic variables were omitted from the matching algorithm, imbalances on those variables were also minimized using external controls. Treatment effects varied markedly depending on the choice of control area, but in the case study the variation was minimal after adjusting for the characteristics of areas. We used simulations to assess relative bias and means-squared error, as this could not be done in the case study. A particular feature of the simulations was unexplained variation in the outcome between areas. We found that the likely impact of unexplained variation for hospital admissions dwarfed the benefits of better balance on individual-level variables, leading us to prefer local controls in this instance. In other scenarios, in which there was less unexplained variation in the outcome between areas, bias and mean-squared error were optimized using external controls. We identify some general considerations relevant to the choice of control population in observational studies.

Family members of older persons with multi-morbidity and their experiences of case managers in Sweden: an interpretive phenomenological approach

BACKGROUND

Family members of older persons (75+) with multi-morbidity are likely to benefit from utilising case management services performed by case managers. However, research has not yet explored their experiences of case managers.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to deepen the understanding of the importance of case managers to family members of older persons (75+) with multi-morbidity.

DESIGN

The study design was based on an interpretive phenomenological approach.

METHOD

Data were collected through individual interviews with 16 family members in Sweden. The interviews were analysed by means of an interpretive phenomenological approach.

RESULTS

The findings revealed one overarching theme: "Helps to fulfil my unmet needs", based on three sub-themes: (1) "Helps me feel secure - Experiencing a trusting relationship", (2) "Confirms and strengthens me - Challenging my sense of being alone" and (3) "Being my personal guide - Increasing my competence".

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

The findings indicate that case managers were able to fulfil unmet needs of family members. The latter recognised the importance of case managers providing them with professional services tailored to their individual needs. The findings can contribute to the improvement of case management models not only for older persons but also for their family members.

Long-term impact of a real-world coordinated lifestyle promotion initiative in primary care: a quasi-experimental cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Integration of lifestyle promotion in routine primary care has been suboptimal. Coordinated care models (e.g. screening, brief advice and referral to in-house specialized staff) could facilitate lifestyle promotion practice; they have been shown to increase the quality of services and reduce costs in other areas of care. This study evaluates the long-term impact of a coordinated lifestyle promotion intervention with a multidisciplinary team approach in a primary care setting.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental, cross-sectional design was used to compare three intervention centres using a coordinated care model and three control centres using a traditional model of lifestyle promotion care. Outcomes were inspired by using the RE-AIM framework: reach, the proportion of patients receiving lifestyle promotion; effectiveness, self-reported attitudes and competency among staff; adoption, proportion of staff reporting daily practice of lifestyle promotion and referral; and implementation, of the coordinated care model. The impact was investigated after 3 and 5 years. Data collection involved a patient questionnaire (intervention, n = 433-497; control, n = 455-497), a staff questionnaire (intervention, n = 77-76; control, n = 43-56) and structured interviews with managers (n = 8). The χ(2) test or Fisher exact test with adjustment for clustering by centre was used for the analysis. Problem-driven content analysis was used to analyse the interview data.

RESULTS

The findings were consistent over time. Intervention centres did not show higher rates for reach of patients or adoption among staff at the 3- or 5-year follow-up. Some conceptual differences between intervention and control staff remained over time in that the intervention staff were more positive on two of eight effectiveness outcomes (one attitude and one competency item) compared with control staff. The Lifestyle team protocol, which included structural opportunities for coordinated care, was implemented at all intervention centres. Lifestyle teams were perceived to have an important role at the centres in driving the lifestyle promotion work forward and being a forum for knowledge exchange. However, resources to refer patients to specialized staff were used inconsistently.

CONCLUSIONS

The Lifestyle teams may have offered opportunities for lifestyle promotion practice and contributed to enabling conditions at centre level but had limited impact on lifestyle promotion practices.

Wake up, wake up! It's me! It's my life! patient narratives on person-centeredness in the integrated care context: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Person-centered care emphasizes a holistic, humanistic approach that puts patients first, at the center of medical care. Person-centeredness is also considered a core element of integrated care. Yet typologies of integrated care mainly describe how patients fit within integrated services, rather than how services fit into the patient's world. Patient-centeredness has been commonly defined through physician's behaviors aimed at delivering patient-centered care. Yet, it is unclear how 'person-centeredness' is realized in integrated care through the patient voice. We aimed to explore patient narratives of person-centeredness in the integrated care context.

METHODS

We conducted a phenomenological, qualitative study, including semi-structured interviews with 22 patients registered in the Northwest London Integrated Care Pilot. We incorporated Grounded Theory approach principles, including substantive open and selective coding, development of concepts and categories, and constant comparison.

RESULTS

We identified six themes representing core 'ingredients' of person-centeredness in the integrated care context: "Holism", "Naming", "Heed", "Compassion", "Continuity of care", and "Agency and Empowerment", all depicting patient expectations and assumptions on doctor and patient roles in integrated care. We bring examples showing that when these needs are met, patient experience of care is at its best. Yet many patients felt 'unseen' by their providers and the healthcare system. We describe how these six themes can portray a continuum between having own physical and emotional 'Space' to be 'seen' and heard vs. feeling 'translucent', 'unseen', and unheard. These two conflicting experiences raise questions about current typologies of the patient-physician relationship as a 'dyad', the meanings patients attributed to 'care', and the theoretical correspondence between 'person-centeredness' and 'integrated care'.

CONCLUSIONS

Person-centeredness is a crucial issue for patients in integrated care, yet it was variably achieved in the current pilot. Patients in the context of integrated care, as in other contexts, strive to have their own unique physical and emotional 'space' to be 'seen' and heard. Integrated care models can benefit from incorporating person-centeredness as a core element.

Unplanned admissions and readmissions in older people: a review of recent evidence on identifying and managing high-risk individuals

Rising unplanned hospital admissions are a problem in ageing populations worldwide. These admissions are associated with poor outcomes for older people, contribute to rising health care costs and impede the provision of planned care. Policy and practice in recent years has focused on identification of those at risk of unplanned admission and early intervention via a range of admission avoidance services. Despite this, unplanned admissions in older people continue to rise, and managing demand for unplanned care remains a priority. Questions remain about the risk factors for unplanned admission and the best approaches to identifying and intervening with those at risk. This review explores recent evidence on admission rates, risk factors for unplanned admission in older people, identification of those at highest risk and interventions to avert unplanned admission.

Assessing patients' experience of integrated care: a survey of patient views in the North West London Integrated Care Pilot

INTRODUCTION

Despite the importance of continuity of care and patient engagement, few studies have captured patients' views on integrated care. This study assesses patient experience in the Integrated Care Pilot in North West London with the aim to help clinicians and policymakers understand patients' acceptability of integrated care and design future initiatives.

METHODS

A survey was developed, validated and distributed to 2029 randomly selected practice patients identified as having a care plan.

RESULTS

A total of 405 questionnaires were included for analysis. Respondents identified a number of benefits associated with the pilot, including increased patient involvement in decision-making, improved patient-provider relationship, better organisation and access to care, and enhanced inter-professional communication. However, only 22.4% were aware of having a care plan, and of these only 37.9% had a copy of the care plan. Knowledge of care plans was significantly associated with a more positive experience.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reinforces the view that integrated care can improve quality of care and patient experience. However, care planning was a complex and technically challenging process that occurred more slowly than planned with wide variation in quality and time of recruitment to the pilot, making it difficult to assess the sustainability of benefits.

Does integrated governance lead to integrated patient care? Findings from the innovation forum

Good integration of services that aim to reduce avoidable acute hospital bed use by older people requires frontline staff to be aware of service options and access them in a timely manner. In three localities where closer inter-organisational integration was taking place, this research sought patients' perceptions of the care received across and within organisational boundaries. Between February and July 2008, qualitative methods were used to map the care journeys of 18 patients (six from each site). Patient interviews (46) covered care received before, at the time of and following a health crisis. Additional interviews (66) were undertaken with carers and frontline staff. Grounded theory-based approaches showed examples of well-integrated care against a background of underuse of services for preventing health crises and a reliance on 'traditional' referral patterns and services at the time of a health crisis. There was scope to raise both practitioner and patient awareness of alternative care options and to expand the availability and visibility of care 'closer to home' services such as rapid response teams. Concerns voiced by patients centred on the adequacy of arrangements for organising ongoing care, while family members reported being excluded from discussions about care arrangements and the roles they were expected to play. The coordination of care was also affected by communication difficulties between practitioners (particularly across organisational boundaries) and a lack of compatible technologies to facilitate information sharing. Finally, closer organisational integration seemed to have limited impact on care at the patient/practitioner interface. To improve care experienced by patients, organisational integration needs to be coupled with vertical integration within organisations to ensure that strategic goals influence the actions of frontline staff. As they experience the complete care journey, feedback from patients can play an important role in the service redesign agenda.

Integrated care pilot in north-west London: a mixed methods evaluation

INTRODUCTION

This paper provides the results of a year-long evaluation of a large-scale integrated care pilot in north-west London. The pilot aimed to integrate care across primary, acute, community, mental health and social care for people with diabetes and/or those aged 75+ through care planning, multidisciplinary case reviews, information sharing and project management support.

METHODS

The evaluation team conducted qualitative studies of change at organisational, clinician and patient levels (using interviews, focus groups and a survey); and quantitative analysis of change in service use and patient-level clinical outcomes (using patient-level datasets and a matched control study).

RESULTS

The pilot had successfully engaged provider organisations, created a shared strategic vision and established governance structures. However, the engagement of clinicians was variable and there was no evidence to date of significant reductions in emergency admissions. There was some evidence of changes in care processes.

CONCLUSION

Although the pilot has demonstrated the beginnings of large-scale change, it remains in the early stages and faces significant challenges as it seeks to become sustainable for the longer term. It is critical that National Health Service managers and clinicians have realistic expectations of what can be achieved in a relatively short period of time.

Barriers and facilitators to integrating care: experiences from the English Integrated Care Pilots

BACKGROUND

In 2008, the English Department of Health appointed 16 'Integrated Care Pilots' which used a range of approaches to provide better integrated care. We report qualitative analyses from a three-year multi-method evaluation to identify barriers and facilitators to successful integration of care.

THEORY AND METHODS

Data were analysed from transcripts of 213 in-depth staff interviews, and from semi-structured questionnaires (the 'Living Document') completed by staff in pilot sites at six points over a two-year period. Emerging findings were therefore built from 'bottom up' and grounded in the data. However, we were then interested in how these findings compared and contrasted with more generic analyses. Therefore after our analyses were complete we then systematically compared and contrasted the findings with the analysis of barriers and facilitators to quality improvement identified in a systematic review by Kaplan et al. (2010) and the analysis of more micro-level shapers of behaviour found in Normalisation Process Theory (May et al. 2007). Neither of these approaches claims to be full blown theories but both claim to provide mid-range theoretical arguments which may be used to structure existing data and which can be undercut or reinforced by new data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Many barriers and facilitators to integrating care are those of any large-scale organisational change. These include issues relating to leadership, organisational culture, information technology, physician involvement, and availability of resources. However, activities which appear particularly important for delivering integrated care include personal relationships between leaders in different organisations, the scale of planned activities, governance and finance arrangements, support for staff in new roles, and organisational and staff stability. We illustrate our analyses with a 'routemap' which identifies questions that providers may wish to consider when planning interventions to improve the integration of care.