Search results

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted healthcare systems, presenting unforeseen challenges that necessitated the implementation of change management strategies to adapt to the new contextual conditions. This study aims to analyze organizational changes within the total hip replacement (THR) surgery pathway at multiple levels, including macro, meso and micro. It employs data triangulation from various sources to gauge the complexity of the change process and comprehend how multi-level decision-making influenced an unexpected shift.

A multicentric, single in-depth case study was conducted using a mixed-methods approach. Data sources included patient-reported outcome measures specific to the THR pathway and carefully structured in-depth interviews administered to managers and clinicians in two healthcare organizations serving the same population.

Decisions made at the macro level resulted in an overall reduction in surgical activities. Organizational changes at the meso level led to a complete cessation or partial reorganization of activities. Micro-level actions for change and adaptation revealed diverse and fragmented change management strategies.

Organizations with segmented structures may require a robust and structured department for coordinating change management responses to prevent the entire system from becoming stuck in the absorptive phase of change. However, it is important to recognize that absorptive solutions can serve as a starting point for genuine innovations in change management.

The utilization of data triangulation enables the authors to visualize how specific changes implemented in response to the pandemic have influenced the observed outcomes. From a managerial perspective, it provides insights into how future innovations could be introduced.

Value-based healthcare suggested using patient-reported information to complement the information available in the medical records and administrative healthcare data to provide insights into patients' perceptions of satisfaction, experience and self-reported outcomes. However, little attention has been devoted to questions about factors fostering the use of patient-reported information to create value at the system level.

Action research design is carried out to elicit possible triggers using the case of patient-reported experience and outcome data for breast cancer women along their clinical pathway in the clinical breast network of Tuscany (Italy).

The case shows that communication and engagement of multi-stakeholder representation are needed for making information actionable in a multi-level, multispecialty care pathway organized in a clinical network; moreover, political and managerial support from higher level governance is a stimulus for legitimizing the use for quality improvement. At the organizational level, an external facilitator disclosing and discussing real-world uses of collected data is a trigger to link measures to action. Also, clinical champion(s) and clear goals are key success factors. Nonetheless, resource munificent and dedicated information support tools together with education and learning routines are enabling factors.

Current literature focuses on key factors that impact performance information use often considering unidimensional performance and internal sources of information. The use of patient/user-reported information is not yet well-studied especially in supporting quality improvement in multi-stakeholder governance. The work appears relevant for the implications it carries, especially for policymakers and public sector managers when confronting the gap in patient-reported measures for quality improvement.