Examining Interprofessional teams structures and processes in the implementation of a primary care intervention (Health TAPESTRY) for older adults using normalization process theory

Ruta Valaitis, Laura Cleghorn, Lisa Dolovich, Gina Agarwal, Jessica Gaber, Derelie Mangin, Doug Oliver, Fiona Parascandalo, Jenny Ploeg, Cathy Risdon, Ruta Valaitis, Laura Cleghorn, Lisa Dolovich, Gina Agarwal, Jessica Gaber, Derelie Mangin, Doug Oliver, Fiona Parascandalo, Jenny Ploeg, Cathy Risdon

Abstract

Background: Many countries are engaged in primary care reforms to support older adults who are living longer in the community. Health Teams Advancing Patient Experience: Strengthening Quality [Health TAPESTRY] is a primary care intervention aimed at supporting older adults that involves trained volunteers, interprofessional teams, technology, and system navigation. This paper examines implementation of Health TAPESTRY in relation to interprofessional teamwork including volunteers.

Methods: This study applied Normalization Process Theory (NPT) and used a descriptive qualitative approach [1] embedded in a mixed-methods, pragmatic randomized controlled trial. It was situated in two primary care practice sites in a large urban setting in Ontario, Canada. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with primary care providers, clinical managers, administrative assistants, volunteers, and a volunteer coordinator. Data was collected at 4 months (June-July 2015) and 12 months (February-March 2016) after intervention start-up. Patients were interviewed at the end of the six-month intervention. Field notes were taken at weekly huddle meetings.

Results: Overall, 84 participants were included in 17 focus groups and 13 interviews; 24 field notes were collected. Themes were organized under four NPT constructs of implementation: 1) Coherence- (making sense/understanding of the program's purpose/value) generating comprehensive assessments of older adults; strengthening health promotion, disease prevention, and self-management; enhancing patient-focused care; strengthening interprofessional care delivery; improving coordination of health and community services. 2) Cognitive Participation- (enrolment/buy-in) tackling new ways of working; attaining role clarity. 3) Collective Action- (enactment/operationalizing) changing team processes; reconfiguring resources. 4) Reflective Monitoring- (appraisal) improving teamwork and collaboration; reconfiguring roles and processes.

Conclusions: This study contributes key strategies for effective implementation of interventions involving interprofessional primary care teams. Findings indicate that regular communication among all team members, the development of procedures and/or protocols to support team processes, and ongoing review and feedback are critical to implementation of innovations involving primary care teams.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02283723 November 5, 2014. Prospectively registered.

Keywords: Implementation; Interprofessional team; Normalization process theory; Older adults; Primary care; Volunteers.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Interprofessional Team Huddle and Report Triage Process

References

    1. Sandelowski M. Focus on research methods: whatever happened to qualitative description? Res Nurs Health. 2000;23(4):334–340. doi: 10.1002/1098-240X(200008)23:4<334::AID-NUR9>;2-G.
    1. OECD. Strengthening primary care systems: OECD Publishing; 2016.
    1. Osborn R, Moulds D, Squires D, Doty MM, Anderson C. International survey of older adults finds shortcomings in access, coordination, and patient-centered care. Health Aff. 2014;33(12):2247–2255. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0947.
    1. Lewis S. A system in name only—access, variation, and reform in Canada's provinces. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(6):497–500. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1414409.
    1. Osborn R, Doty MM, Moulds D, Sarnak DO, Shah A. Older Americans were sicker and faced more financial barriers to health care than counterparts in other countries. Health Aff. 2017;36(12):2123–2132. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1048.
    1. Newbould J, Burt J, Bower P, Blakeman T, Kennedy A, Rogers A, et al. Experiences of care planning in England: interviews with patients with long term conditions. BMC Fam Pract. 2012;13(1):71. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-13-71.
    1. Tinetti ME, Fried TR, Boyd CM. Designing health care for the most common chronic condition—multimorbidity. Jama. 2012;307(23):2493–2494. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.5265.
    1. King DE, Xiang J, Pilkerton CS. Multimorbidity trends in United States adults, 1988–2014. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31(4):503–513. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2018.04.180008.
    1. Pefoyo AJK, Bronskill SE, Gruneir A, Calzavara A, Thavorn K, Petrosyan Y, et al. The increasing burden and complexity of multimorbidity. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):415. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1733-2.
    1. Roy M, Levasseur M, Couturier Y, Lindström B, Généreux M. The relevance of positive approaches to health for patient-centered care medicine. Prev Med Rep. 2015;2:10–12. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2014.11.005.
    1. Lafortune C, Huson K, Santi S, Stolee P. Community-based primary health care for older adults: a qualitative study of the perceptions of clients, caregivers and health care providers. BMC Geriatr. 2015;15(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s12877-015-0052-x.
    1. Russell GM, Miller WL, Gunn JM, Levesque J-F, Harris MF, Hogg WE, et al. Contextual levers for team-based primary care: lessons from reform interventions in five jurisdictions in three countries. Fam Pract. 2017;35(3):276–284. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmx095.
    1. Valaitis R, Carter N, Lam A, Nicholl J, Feather J, Cleghorn L. Implementation and maintenance of patient navigation programs linking primary care with community-based health and social services: A scoping literature review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):116. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2046-1.
    1. Oliver D, Dolovich L, Lamarche L, Gaber J, Avilla E, Bhamani M, et al. A Volunteer Program to Connect Primary Care and the Home to support the Health of older adults: a Community Case study. Front Med. 2018;5:48. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2018.00048.
    1. Dolovich L, Oliver D, Lamarche L, Agarwal G, Carr T, Chan D, et al. A protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial using the health teams advancing patient experience: strengthening quality (health TAPESTRY) platform approach to promote person-focused primary healthcare for older adults. Implement Sci 2016;11(1):1.
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 2008;337:a1655.
    1. Ghorob A, Bodenheimer T. Building teams in primary care: a practical guide. Fam, Syst, Health. 2015;33(3):182. doi: 10.1037/fsh0000120.
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 2015;350:h1258.
    1. May CR, Mair FS, Dowrick CF, Finch TL. Process evaluation for complex interventions in primary care: understanding trials using the normalization process model. BMC Fam Pract. 2007;8(1):42. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-8-42.
    1. Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0.
    1. May CR, Mair F, Finch T, MacFarlane A, Dowrick C, Treweek S, et al. Development of a theory of implementation and integration: normalization process theory. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):29. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-29.
    1. McEvoy R, Ballini L, Maltoni S, O’Donnell CA, Mair FS, MacFarlane A. A qualitative systematic review of studies using the normalization process theory to research implementation processes. Implement Sci. 2014;9(1):2. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-2.
    1. O’Reilly P, Lee SH, O’Sullivan M, Cullen W, Kennedy C, MacFarlane A. Assessing the facilitators and barriers of interdisciplinary team working in primary care using normalisation process theory: an integrative review. PLoS One. 2017;12(5):e0177026. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177026.
    1. Rosser WW, Colwill JM, Kasperski J, Wilson L. Progress of Ontario’s family health team model: a patient-centered medical home. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9(2):165–171. doi: 10.1370/afm.1228.
    1. QSR International . NVivo qualitative data analysis software (version 10) Australia: QSR International Pty Ltd Victoria; 2012.
    1. Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2006.
    1. Bowen GA. Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. Int J Qual Methods. 2006;5(3):12–23. doi: 10.1177/160940690600500304.
    1. Fiscella K, Mauksch L, Bodenheimer T, Salas E. Improving care Teams' functioning: recommendations from team science. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2017;43(7):361–368. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2017.03.009.
    1. Wagner EH, LeRoy L, Schaefer J, Bailit M, Coleman K, Zhan C, et al. How do innovative primary care practices achieve the quadruple aim? J Ambul Care Manage. 2018;41(4):288–297. doi: 10.1097/JAC.0000000000000249.
    1. Mareš J. People-centred health care: A good idea but difficult to implement. Kontakt. 2017;1(19):e1–93.
    1. Grossmanâ R, Schoen J, Mallett JW, Brentani A, Kaselitz E, Heisler M. Challenges facing community health workers in Brazil's family health strategy: a qualitative study. Int J Health Plann Manag. 2018;33(2):309–320. doi: 10.1002/hpm.2456.
    1. Howard J, Miller WL, Willard-Grace R, Burger ES, Kelleher KJ, Nutting PA, et al. Creating and sustaining care teams in primary care: perspectives from innovative patient-centered medical homes. Qual Manage Healthc. 2018;27(3):123–129. doi: 10.1097/QMH.0000000000000176.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren