Health Policy & Administration, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Center for Health Care and Policy Research, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2020 Dec;55 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):1129-1143. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13585.
To explore why and how health systems are engaging in care delivery redesign (CDR)-defined as the variety of tools and organizational change processes health systems use to pursue the Triple Aim.
A purposive sample of 24 health systems across 4 states as part of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Comparative Health System Performance Initiative.
An exploratory qualitative study design to gain an "on the ground" understanding of health systems' motivations for, and approaches to, CDR, with the goals of identifying key dimensions of CDR, and gauging the depth of change that is possible based on the particular approaches to redesign care being adopted by the health systems.
Semi-structured telephone interviews with health system executives and physician organization leaders from 24 health systems (n = 162).
We identify and define 13 CDR activities and find that the health systems' efforts are varied in terms of both the combination of activities they are engaging in and the depth of innovation within each activity. Health system executives who report strong internal motivation for their CDR efforts describe more confidence in their approach to CDR than those who report strong external motivation. Health system leaders face uncertainty when implementing CDR due to a limited evidence base and because of the slower than expected pace of payment change.
The ability to validly and reliably measure CDR activities-particularly across varying organizational contexts and markets-is currently limited but is key to better understanding CDR's impact on intended outcomes, which is important for guiding both health system decision making and policy making.
探索卫生系统为何以及如何进行医疗服务提供的再设计(CDR)——这是卫生系统为实现三重目标而采用的各种工具和组织变革流程的定义。
作为美国医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)比较医疗系统绩效倡议的一部分,对来自四个州的 24 个卫生系统进行了一项有目的的抽样调查。
一项探索性的定性研究设计,旨在深入了解卫生系统进行 CDR 的动机和方法,目的是确定 CDR 的关键维度,并根据卫生系统采用的特定的再设计护理方法来衡量可能的变革深度。
对来自 24 个卫生系统(n=162)的卫生系统行政人员和医师组织领导进行半结构化电话访谈。
我们确定并定义了 13 项 CDR 活动,并发现卫生系统的努力在其参与的活动组合以及每项活动的创新深度方面都存在差异。报告对 CDR 工作有强烈内部动力的卫生系统行政人员比报告有强烈外部动力的行政人员对 CDR 方法更有信心。由于证据基础有限,以及支付变革的速度低于预期,卫生系统领导者在实施 CDR 时面临不确定性。
目前,有效和可靠地衡量 CDR 活动的能力——特别是在不同的组织背景和市场中——受到限制,但这是更好地了解 CDR 对预期结果的影响的关键,这对于指导卫生系统决策和政策制定都很重要。