» Articles » PMID: 27527614

Effect of Care Management Program Structure on Implementation: a Normalization Process Theory Analysis

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Health Services
Date 2016 Aug 17
PMID 27527614
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Care management in primary care can be effective in helping patients with chronic disease improve their health status, however, primary care practices are often challenged with implementation. Further, there are different ways to structure care management that may make implementation more or less successful. Normalization process theory (NPT) provides a means of understanding how a new complex intervention can become routine (normalized) in practice. In this study, we used NPT to understand how care management structure affected how well care management became routine in practice.

Methods: Data collection involved semi-structured interviews and observations conducted at 25 practices in five physician organizations in Michigan, USA. Practices were selected to reflect variation in physician organizations, type of care management program, and degree of normalization. Data were transcribed, qualitatively coded and analyzed, initially using an editing approach and then a template approach with NPT as a guiding framework.

Results: Seventy interviews and 25 observations were completed. Two key structures for care management organization emerged: practice-based care management where the care managers were embedded in the practice as part of the practice team; and centralized care management where the care managers worked independently of the practice work flow and was located outside the practice. There were differences in normalization of care management across practices. Practice-based care management was generally better normalized as compared to centralized care management. Differences in normalization were well explained by the NPT, and in particular the collective action construct. When care managers had multiple and flexible opportunities for communication (interactional workability), had the requisite knowledge, skills, and personal characteristics (skill set workability), and the organizational support and resources (contextual integration), a trusting professional relationship (relational integration) developed between practice providers and staff and the care manager. When any of these elements were missing, care management implementation appeared to be affected negatively.

Conclusions: Although care management can introduce many new changes into delivery of clinical practice, implementing it successfully as a new complex intervention is possible. NPT can be helpful in explaining differences in implementing a new care management program with a view to addressing them during implementation planning.

Citing Articles

An Organizational Case Study of Mental Models among Health System Leaders during Early-Stage Implementation of a Population Health Approach.

Terpou B, Bird M, Srinivasan D, Bains S, Rosella L, Desveaux L J Healthc Leadersh. 2024; 16:389-401.

PMID: 39430770 PMC: 11491081. DOI: 10.2147/JHL.S475322.


Finding meaning: a realist-informed perspective on social risk screening and relationships as mechanisms of change.

Bunce A, Morrissey S, Kaufmann J, Krancari M, Bowen M, Gold R Front Health Serv. 2023; 3:1282292.

PMID: 37936880 PMC: 10626542. DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2023.1282292.


Integrating a community-based continuous mass dog vaccination delivery strategy into the veterinary system of Tanzania: A process evaluation using normalization process theory.

Duamor C, Hampson K, Lankester F, Lugelo A, Changalucha J, Lushasi K One Health. 2023; 17():100575.

PMID: 37332884 PMC: 10272491. DOI: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2023.100575.


Translational framework for implementation evaluation and research: a normalisation process theory coding manual for qualitative research and instrument development.

May C, Albers B, Bracher M, Finch T, Gilbert A, Girling M Implement Sci. 2022; 17(1):19.

PMID: 35193611 PMC: 8861599. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-022-01191-x.


Scale-up of prevention programmes: sustained state-wide use of programme delivery software is explained by normalised self-organised adoption and non-adoption.

Goldberg E, Conte K, Loblay V, Groen S, Persson L, Innes-Hughes C Implement Sci. 2022; 17(1):5.

PMID: 35033154 PMC: 8760884. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-021-01184-2.


References
1.
Roland M, Guthrie B, Thome D . Primary medical care in the United kingdom. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012; 25 Suppl 1:S6-11. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2012.02.110200. View

2.
Crabtree B, Chase S, Wise C, Schiff G, Schmidt L, Goyzueta J . Evaluation of patient centered medical home practice transformation initiatives. Med Care. 2010; 49(1):10-6. PMC: 3130251. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181f80766. View

3.
Krause D . Economic effectiveness of disease management programs: a meta-analysis. Dis Manag. 2005; 8(2):114-34. DOI: 10.1089/dis.2005.8.114. View

4.
Isaacson N, Holtrop J, Cohen D, Ferrer R, McKee M . Examining role change in primary care practice. J Prim Care Community Health. 2013; 3(3):195-200. DOI: 10.1177/2150131911428338. View

5.
Elissen A, Nolte E, Knai C, Brunn M, Chevreul K, Conklin A . Is Europe putting theory into practice? A qualitative study of the level of self-management support in chronic care management approaches. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013; 13:117. PMC: 3621080. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-117. View