Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Integration of research and practice to improve public health and healthcare delivery through a collaborative 'Health Integration Team' model - a qualitative investigation

Authors: Sabi Redwood, Emer Brangan, Verity Leach, Jeremy Horwood, Jenny L. Donovan

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Economic considerations and the requirement to ensure the quality, safety and integration of research with health and social care provision have given rise to local developments of collaborative organisational forms and strategies to span the translational gaps. One such model – the Health Integration Team (HIT) model in Bristol in the United Kingdom (UK) - brings together National Health Service (NHS) organisations, universities, local authorities, patients and the public to facilitate the systematic application of evidence to promote integration across healthcare pathways. This study aimed to (1) provide empirical evidence documenting the evolution of the model; (2) to identify the social and organisational processes and theory of change underlying healthcare knowledge and practice; and (3) elucidate the key aspects of the HIT model for future development and translation to other localities.

Methods

Contemporaneous documents were analysed, using procedures associated with Framework Analysis to produce summarised data for descriptive accounts. In-depth interviews were undertaken with key informants and analysed thematically. Comparative methods were applied to further analyse the two data sets.

Results

One hundred forty documents were analysed and 10 interviews conducted with individuals in leadership positions in the universities, NHS commissioning and provider organisations involved in the design and implementation of the HIT model. Data coalesced around four overarching themes: ‘Whole system’ engagement, requiring the active recruitment of all those who have a stake in the area of practice being considered, and ‘collaboration’ to enable coproduction were identified as ‘process’ themes. System-level integration and innovation were identified as potential ‘outcomes’ with far-reaching impacts on population health and service delivery.

Conclusion

The HIT model emerged as a particular response to the perceived need for integration of research and practice to improve public health and healthcare delivery at a time of considerable organisational turmoil and financial constraints. The concept gained momentum and will likely be of interest to those involved in setting up similar arrangements, and researchers in the social and implementation sciences with an interest in their evaluation.
Literature
4.
go back to reference Walshe K, Davies HTO. Health research, development and innovation in England from 1988 to 2013: from research production to knowledge mobilization. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(3 suppl):1–12.CrossRefPubMed Walshe K, Davies HTO. Health research, development and innovation in England from 1988 to 2013: from research production to knowledge mobilization. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(3 suppl):1–12.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Rycroft-Malone J, Wilkinson J, Burton CR, Harvey G, McCormack B, Graham I, Staniszewska S. Collaborative action around implementation in Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care: towards a programme theory. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(3 suppl):13–26.CrossRefPubMed Rycroft-Malone J, Wilkinson J, Burton CR, Harvey G, McCormack B, Graham I, Staniszewska S. Collaborative action around implementation in Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care: towards a programme theory. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(3 suppl):13–26.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference French CE, Ferlie E, Fulop NJ. The international spread of Academic Health Science Centres: A scoping review and the case of policy transfer to England. Health Policy. 2014;117(3):382–91.CrossRefPubMed French CE, Ferlie E, Fulop NJ. The international spread of Academic Health Science Centres: A scoping review and the case of policy transfer to England. Health Policy. 2014;117(3):382–91.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Wehrens R, Bekker M, Bal R. Within The Netherlands, Dutch Academic Collaborative Centres for Public Health: Development through time – Issues, dilemmas and coping strategies. Evidence Policy. 2012;8:149–70. doi:10.1332/174426412X640063.CrossRef Wehrens R, Bekker M, Bal R. Within The Netherlands, Dutch Academic Collaborative Centres for Public Health: Development through time – Issues, dilemmas and coping strategies. Evidence Policy. 2012;8:149–70. doi:10.​1332/​174426412X640063​.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Gridley K, Spiers G, Aspinal F, et al. Can general practitioner commissioning deliver equity and excellence? Evidence from two studies of service improvement in the English NHS. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012;17(2):87–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2011.010176.CrossRefPubMed Gridley K, Spiers G, Aspinal F, et al. Can general practitioner commissioning deliver equity and excellence? Evidence from two studies of service improvement in the English NHS. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012;17(2):87–93. http://​dx.​doi.​org/​10.​1258/​jhsrp.​2011.​010176.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Weiss CH. Evaluation Research: Methods of Assessing Program Effectiveness. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1972. Weiss CH. Evaluation Research: Methods of Assessing Program Effectiveness. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1972.
14.
go back to reference Weiss C. Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory: Exploring Theory-Based Evaluation for Comprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families. In: Connell J, Kuchisch A, Schorr LB, Weiss C, editors. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concepts, Methods and Contexts. New York: Aspen Institute; 1995. p. 65–92. Weiss C. Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory: Exploring Theory-Based Evaluation for Comprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families. In: Connell J, Kuchisch A, Schorr LB, Weiss C, editors. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concepts, Methods and Contexts. New York: Aspen Institute; 1995. p. 65–92.
16.
go back to reference Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349.CrossRefPubMed Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess R, editors. Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge; 1993. p. 173–94. Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess R, editors. Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge; 1993. p. 173–94.
18.
go back to reference Gale N, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S: Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research, BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013:117; doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-117 Gale N, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S: Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research, BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013:117; doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-117
19.
go back to reference Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine; 1967. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine; 1967.
22.
go back to reference Wenger, Etienne, Jean L. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. Wenger, Etienne, Jean L. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.
23.
go back to reference Wenger E, McDermott RA, Snyder W. Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press; 2002. Wenger E, McDermott RA, Snyder W. Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press; 2002.
24.
go back to reference Guston, David H. Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: an introduction. Sci Technol Hum Val. 2001;26(4):399–408.CrossRef Guston, David H. Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: an introduction. Sci Technol Hum Val. 2001;26(4):399–408.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Parker J, Crona B. On being all things to all people: Boundary organizations and the contemporary research university. Soc Stud Sci. 2012;42(2):262–89.CrossRef Parker J, Crona B. On being all things to all people: Boundary organizations and the contemporary research university. Soc Stud Sci. 2012;42(2):262–89.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Gagliardi AR, Berta W, Kothari A, Boyko J, Urquhart R. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review. Impl Sci. 2016;11(1):1. Gagliardi AR, Berta W, Kothari A, Boyko J, Urquhart R. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review. Impl Sci. 2016;11(1):1.
27.
go back to reference Kothari A, Wathen CN. A critical second look at integrated knowledge translation. Health Policy. 2013;109(2):187–91.CrossRefPubMed Kothari A, Wathen CN. A critical second look at integrated knowledge translation. Health Policy. 2013;109(2):187–91.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Integration of research and practice to improve public health and healthcare delivery through a collaborative 'Health Integration Team' model - a qualitative investigation
Authors
Sabi Redwood
Emer Brangan
Verity Leach
Jeremy Horwood
Jenny L. Donovan
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1445-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue