Has cross-level clinical coordination changed in the context of the pandemic? The case of the Catalan health system

Author:

Campaz-Landazabal DanielaORCID,Vargas IngridORCID,Sánchez ElviraORCID,Cots FrancescORCID,Plaja PereORCID,Perez-Castejón Joan ManuelORCID,Sánchez-Hidalgo Antonio,Vázquez María LuisaORCID

Abstract

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic triggered numerous changes in health services organisation, whose effects on clinical coordination are unknown. The aim is to analyse changes in the experience and perception of cross-level clinical coordination and related factors of primary (PC) and secondary care (SC) doctors in the Catalan health system between 2017 and 2022. Methods Comparison of two cross-sectional studies based on online surveys by means of the self-administration of the COORDENA-CAT (2017) and COORDENA-TICs (2022) questionnaires to PC and SC doctors. Final sample n = 3308 in 2017 and n = 2277 in 2022. Outcome variables: experience of cross-level information and clinical management coordination and perception of cross-level clinical coordination in the healthcare area and related factors. Stratification variables: level of care and year. Adjusting variables: sex, years of experience, type of specialty, type of hospital, type of management of PC/SC. Descriptive bivariate and multivariate analysis using Poisson regressions models to detect changes between years in total and by levels of care. Results Compared with 2017, while cross-level clinical information coordination remained relatively high, with a slight improvement, doctors of both care levels reported a worse experience of cross-level clinical management coordination, particularly of care consistency (repetition of test) and accessibility to PC and, of general perception, which was worse in SC doctors. There was also a worsening in organisational (institutional support, set objectives, time available for coordination), attitudinal (job satisfaction) and interactional factors (knowledge between doctors). The use of ICT-based coordination mechanisms such as shared electronic medical records and electronic consultations between PC and SC increased, while the participation in virtual joint clinical conferences was limited. Conclusions Results show a slight improvement in clinical information but also less expected setbacks in some dimensions of clinical management coordination and in the perception of clinical coordination, suggesting that the increased use of some ICT-based coordination mechanisms did not counteract the effect of the worsened organisational, interactional, and attitudinal factors during the pandemic. Strategies are needed to facilitate direct communication, to improve conditions for the effective use of mechanisms and policies to protect healthcare professionals and services in order to better cope with new crises.

Funder

Instituto de Salud Carlos III

European Regional Development Fund

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference70 articles.

1. Ovretveit J. Does clinical coordination improve quality and save money - A summary review of the evidence. The health foundation [Internet]. 2011;2(June):1–30. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21325659

2. Motulsky A, Sicotte C, MP M, Schuster T, Girard N, Buckeridge D et al. Using Health Information Exchange: Usage and Perceived Usefulness in Primary Care. Stud Health Technol Inform [Internet]. 2019;264:709–13. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31438016/

3. Sampson R, Cooper J, Barbour R, Polson R, Wilson P. Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research. BMJ Open. 2015;5(10):e008708.

4. Bywood P, Jackson-Bowers E, Muecke S. Initiatives to integrate primary and acute health care, including ambulatory care services. Adelaide: Primary Health Care Research & Information Service; 2011.

5. Simpson K, Nham W, Thariath J, Schafer H, Greenwood-Eriksen M, Fetters MD et al. How health systems facilitate patient-centered care and care coordination: a case series analysis to identify best practices. BMC Health Serv Res [Internet]. 2022;22(1):1448. https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08623-w

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3