Click to listen highlighted text! Powered By GSpeech

Home » Posts tagged 'integration' (Page 2)

Tag Archives: integration

Integration: a completely personal view



I feel that there is a lot of “hype” concerning integration of health and social care services, and I do not wish to reinvent the wheel by offering the same definitions and the same process maps.

However, I think the challenge is at a number of different levels. First of all, I think that there needs to be a cultural change whereby the medical and social care cultures meet somewhere. Moving towards a culture where the health and social care needs, both medical and welfare, meet requires some understanding of why and how the cultures are different. There are a number of contributing factors, but it is hard to escape from the inherent difference in organizational structures and functions, personnel, training, budgets, to name but a few. Again, this brings up the problem of the extent to which managers can manage in the NHS without direct experience of how patients are clinically managed in the NHS.

(more…)

Integration in healthcare: a personal view



 

 

 

 

 

 

I feel that there is a lot of “hype” concerning integration of health and social care services, and I do not wish to reinvent the wheel by offering the same definitions and the same process maps.

 

However, I think the challenge is at a number of different levels. First of all, I think that there needs to be a cultural change whereby the medical and social care cultures meet somewhere. Moving towards a culture where the health and social care needs, both medical and welfare, meet requires some understanding of why and how the cultures are different. There are a number of contributing factors, but it is hard to escape from the inherent difference in organizational structures and functions, personnel, training, budgets, to name but a few. Again, this brings up the problem of the extent to which managers can manage in the NHS without direct experience of how patients are clinically managed in the NHS.

 

Secondly, there is no doubt that logistically a NHS, fit for purpose, faces a massive task in being operationally ‘fit for purpose’. We all know about the disaster which was the NHS IT project, but certainly we need a health service where exchange of information between hospitals and primary care, and other institutions, needs to be much more easily achieved, and serious consideration to be given how much (if all) of it is to be shared with the patient himself or herself.

 

I personally don’t wish to move to a world where patients are somehow incentivized to receive the cheapest possible healthcare at the expense of quality, so I think it’s really important that integration is not used to ‘sell’ healthcare from suppliers to the patient in an unnecessary way, either directly or indirectly. I think it is necessary to have a discussion of how a complex patient with multiple needs is best served by a range of medical and other healthcare professionals, but I am mindful of entering into this discussion at the end of a traumatic £3bn organization. If there is to be a realistic chance of producing a cultural change towards integration at all, it is imperative that we do not repeat the same mistakes which threaten to engulf the NHS reorganisation just enacted. To ignore the principal stakeholders (NOT the private healthcare companies BUT the BMA, RCN and other medical colleges) would produce yet another catastrophe, however planning goes into this from thinktanks or management consultants.

Integrated care – there’s an app for that! A hypothetical case study.



Innovation and integrated care

Andrew Neil reminded us this morning on ‘The Sunday Politics’ that there are currently around 4 million individuals who don’t have access to the internet. Prof Michael Porter, chair of strategy at the Harvard Business School, has for a long time reminded us that sectors which have competitive advantage are not necessarily those which are cutting-edge technologically, but his colleague Prof Clay Christensen, chair of innovation at the same institution, has been seminal in introducing the concept of ‘disruptive innovation’. An introduction to this area is here. The central theory of Christensen’s work is the dichotomy of sustaining and disruptive innovation. A sustaining innovation hardly results in the downfall of established companies because it improves the performance of existing products along the dimensions that mainstream customers value. Disruptive innovation, on the other hand, will often have characteristics that traditional customer segments may not want, at least initially. Such innovations will appear as cheaper, simpler and even with inferior quality if compared to existing products, but some marginal or new segment will value it. (more…)

Click to listen highlighted text! Powered By GSpeech