Approaches to Improving Healthcare Delivery by Multi-Stakeholder Alliances

被引:0
|
作者
McHugh, Megan C. [5 ,6 ]
Harvey, Jillian B. [4 ]
Aseyev, Dasha [2 ]
Alexander, Jeffrey A. [1 ]
Beich, Jeff [3 ]
Scanlon, Dennis P. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Sch Publ Hlth, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Penn State Univ, Ctr Hlth Care & Policy Res, University Pk, PA 16802 USA
[3] Jeff Beich Consulting, Grand Isl, NY USA
[4] Penn State Univ, Dept Hlth Policy & Adm, University Pk, PA 16802 USA
[5] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Inst Healthcare Studies, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[6] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Dept Emergency Med, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
来源
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MANAGED CARE | 2012年 / 18卷 / 06期
关键词
ALIGNING FORCES; QUALITY; FRAMEWORK; SERVICES;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: Our purposes were: (1) to describe how 14 multi-stakeholder alliances participating in the Aligning Forces for Quality (AF4Q) initiative approached the charge of improving healthcare delivery at the community level between 2006 and 2010; and (2) to offer insights to policy makers and program planners seeking to promote or establish communitywide quality improvement (QI). Study Design: This was a qualitative study. Methods: A total of 84 semi-structured interviews were conducted with AF4Q alliance leaders between 2006 and 2010, and an iterative coding process was used to identify salient themes. Program documents supplemented the interview data and were used to develop an inventory of the alliances' QI activities using the Leatherman and Sutherland taxonomy of quality-enhancing interventions. Results: Alliances spent years planning their QI approaches and activities. Initial selection of QI activities was driven by the availability of local expertise and resources, rather than alignment with a communitywide vision for quality. Alliances were just as likely to rely on local partners to lead QI activities as they were to establish their own activities. The most commonly adopted QI activities were collaboratives aimed at producing organizational-level changes. Conclusions: Policy makers and program planners seeking to promote communitywide QI should consider developing clear expectations, offering technical assistance at the start of the program, providing information on the evidence base for QI activities, and highlighting additional funding opportunities that could support QI activities. Alliances may need a stronger push to move beyond coordinated, organizational-level activities to more community-focused, cross-organizational QI activities. (Am J Manag Care. 2012;18:S156-S162)
引用
收藏
页码:S156 / S162
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Effects of multi-stakeholder platforms on multi-stakeholder innovation networks: Implications for research for development interventions targeting innovations at scale
    Sartas, Murat
    Schut, Marc
    Hermans, Frans
    van Asten, Piet
    Leeuwis, Cees
    PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (06):
  • [42] Global multi-stakeholder endorsement of the MAFLD definition
    Mendez-Sanchez, Nahum
    Bugianesi, Elisabetta
    Gish, Robert G.
    Lammert, Frank
    Tilg, Herbert
    Nguyen, Mindie H.
    Sarin, Shiv K.
    Fabrellas, Nuria
    Zelber-Sagi, Shira
    Fan, Jian-Gao
    Shiha, Gamal
    Targher, Giovanni
    Zheng, Ming-Hua
    Chan, Wah-Kheong
    Vinker, Shlomo
    Kawaguchi, Takumi
    Castera, Laurent
    Yilmaz, Yusuf
    Korenjak, Marko
    Spearman, C. Wendy
    Ungan, Mehmet
    Palmer, Melissa
    El-Shabrawi, Mortada
    Gruss, Hans-Juergen
    Dufour, Jean-Francois
    Dhawan, Anil
    Wedemeyer, Heiner
    George, Jacob
    Valenti, Luca
    Fouad, Yasser
    Romero-Gomez, Manuel
    Eslam, Mohammed
    LANCET GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY, 2022, 7 (05): : 388 - 390
  • [43] The role of transparency in multi-stakeholder educational recommendations
    Yong Zheng
    Juan Ruiz Toribio
    User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 2021, 31 : 513 - 540
  • [44] Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives
    Mena, Sebastien
    Palazzo, Guido
    BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY, 2012, 22 (03) : 527 - 556
  • [45] Modelling Multi-Stakeholder Systems: A Case Study
    Oey, Michel
    Genc, Zulkuf
    Ghorbani, Amineh
    Aldewereld, Huib
    Brazier, Frances
    Aydogan, Reyhan
    Jonker, Catholijn M.
    Timmer, Reinier
    Wijngaards, Niek
    2014 IEEE/WIC/ACM INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCES ON WEB INTELLIGENCE (WI) AND INTELLIGENT AGENT TECHNOLOGIES (IAT), VOL 3, 2014, : 404 - 411
  • [46] Confidence in Models and Simulations: A Multi-Stakeholder Analysis
    Chaudhari, Ashish M.
    Rebentisch, Eric
    Rhodes, Donna H.
    TRANSDISCIPLINARITY AND THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING, 2022, 28 : 103 - 112
  • [47] An Accountability Approach to Resolve Multi-stakeholder Conflicts
    Yanagisawa, Yukiko
    Yokote, Yasuhiko
    COMPUTER SAFETY, RELIABILITY, AND SECURITY (SAFECOMP 2021), 2021, 12853 : 175 - 186
  • [48] Elements of success in multi-stakeholder deliberation platforms
    Garard J.
    Koch L.
    Kowarsch M.
    Palgrave Communications, 4 (1)
  • [49] Multi-stakeholder platforms for integrated water management
    Lankford, Bruce
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2008, 51 (02) : 321 - 322
  • [50] Tensions in talent identification: a multi-stakeholder perspective
    McDonnell, Anthony
    Skuza, Agnieszka
    Jooss, Stefan
    Scullion, Hugh
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, 2023, 34 (06): : 1132 - 1156