Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Collaboration-Based Approaches
  • A Video Abstract for this Element is available here.
    • You have access
    • Open access
  • Cited by 23
  • Graham Martin, THIS Institute (The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute), University of Cambridge, Mary Dixon-Woods, THIS Institute (The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute), University of Cambridge
Publisher:
Cambridge University Press
Online publication date:
August 2022
Print publication year:
2022
Online ISBN:
9781009236867
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009236867
Creative Commons:
Creative Common License - CC Creative Common License - BY Creative Common License - NC Creative Common License - ND
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/creativelicenses
Subjects:
Medicine: General Interest, Medicine
Series:
Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare
Information

Book description

Collaboration-based approaches to healthcare improvement attract much attention. They involve networks of people coming together to cooperate around a common interest, with shared goals of improving care and mutual learning. Longstanding examples of collaborative approaches have been associated with some success in improving outcomes and reducing harm. The evidence for their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, however, remains inconsistent and contingent on the circumstances in which they are deployed and how they are used for what purpose. Several models for collaboration have been developed, varying in structure, format, and balance between internal leadership and external control. The authors focus on two approaches: quality improvement collaboratives and communities of practice. They explore evidence of their impact on health outcomes, and evidence about how best to organise and implement collaboration-based approaches. Using examples of more and less successful collaborations, they offer guidance on the key challenges involved in using collaboration-based approaches to improve healthcare. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

References

References

1.Robert, G, Locock, L, Williams, O et al. Co-producing and co-designing. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2022. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009237024.
2.Aveling, E-L, Martin, GP, Armstrong, N, Banerjee, J, Dixon-Woods, M. Quality improvement through clinical communities: eight lessons for practice. J Health Organ Manage 2012; 26: 158–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777261211230754.
3.Goodwin, N, 6 P, Peck, E, Freeman, T, Posaner, R. Managing Across Diverse Networks of Care: Lessons from Other Sectors. London: National Coordinating Centre for the Service Delivery and Organisation; 2004. www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-social-sciences/social-policy/HSMC/research/diverse-networks-2004.pdf (accessed 14 February 2019).
4.Powell, WW. Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organisation. Res Organ Behav 1990; 12: 295–336. www.researchgate.net/publication/301840604_Neither_Market_Nor_Hierarchy_Network_Forms_of_Organization (accessed 4 June 2020).
5.Brown, JS, Duguid, P. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organ Sci 1991; 2: 40–57. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.40.
6.Greenhalgh, T, Wieringa, S. Is it time to drop the ‘knowledge translation’ metaphor? A critical literature review. J R Soc Med 2011; 104: 501–9. https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110285.
7.Jones, C, Hesterly, WS, Borgatti, SP. general, A theory of network governance: exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Acad Manage Rev 1997; 22: 911–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/259249.
8.Börzel, TA. Networks: reified metaphor or governance panacea? Publ Admin 2011; 89: 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01916.x.
9.Swedberg, R. Principles of Economic Sociology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2003. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4g75.
10.Freidson, E. Medical Work in America: Essays on Health Care. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1989.
11.Yeung, K, Dixon-Woods, M. Design-based regulation and patient safety: a regulatory studies perspective. Soc Sci Med 2010; 71: 502–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.04.017.
12.Parsons, T. The professions and social structure. Soc Forces 1939; 17: 457–67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2570695.
13.Martin, GP, Armstrong, N, Aveling, E-L, Herbert, G, Dixon-Woods, M. Professionalism redundant, reshaped, or reinvigorated? Realizing the ‘third logic’ in contemporary health care. J Health Soc Behav 2015; 56: 378–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146515596353.
14.Bate, P, Robert, G, Bevan, H. The next phase of healthcare improvement: what can we learn from social movements? BMJ Qual Saf 2004; 13: 62–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2003.006965.
15.Plsek, PE. Collaborating across organizational boundaries to improve the quality of care. Am J Infect Control 1997; 25: 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0196-6553(97)90033-x.
16.Schouten, LMT, Hulscher, MEJL, van Everdingen, JJE, Huijsman, R, Grol, RPTM. Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: systematic review. BMJ 2008; 336: 1491–4. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39570.749884.BE.
17.Horbar, JD, Rogowski, J, Plsek, PE, et al. Collaborative quality improvement for neonatal intensive care. Pediatrics 2001; 107: 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.107.1.14.
18.Finks, JF. Collaborative quality improvement. In: Dimick, JB, Greenberg, CC, editors. Success in Academic Surgery: Health Services Research. London: Springer; 2014: 133–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4718-3_12.
19.Share, DA, Campbell, DA, Birkmeyer, N, et al. How a regional collaborative of hospitals and physicians in Michigan cut costs and improved the quality of care. Health Aff 2011; 30: 636–45. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0526.
20.Womble, PR, Linsell, SM, Gao, Y, et al. A statewide intervention to reduce hospitalizations after prostate biopsy. J Urol 2015; 194: 403–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.03.126.
21.Horbar, JD, Soll, RF, Edwards, WH. The Vermont Oxford Network: a community of practice. Clin Perinatol 2010; 37: 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clp.2010.01.003.
22.Tarrant, C, Armstrong, A, Ling, T, Evaluation, Dixon-Woods M. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; forthcoming.
23.Boaden, R, Furnival, J, Sharp, C. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement approach. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; forthcoming.
24.Institute for Healthcare Improvement. The Breakthrough Series: IHI’s Collaborative Model for Achieving Breakthrough Improvement. IHI Innovation Series white paper. Boston, MA: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2003. www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/IHIWhitePapers/TheBreakthroughSeriesIHIsCollaborativeModelforAchievingBreakthroughImprovement.aspx (accessed 28 February 2017).
25.Hulscher, M, Schouten, L, Grol, R. Collaboratives. London: The Health Foundation; 2009. www.health.org.uk/publications/collaboratives (accessed 28 February 2017).
26.Øvretveit, J, Bate, P, Cleary, P, et al. Quality collaboratives: lessons from research. Qual Saf Health Care 2002; 11: 345–51. https://doi.org/10.1136/qhc.11.4.345.
27.Ogrinc, G, Davies, L, Goodman, D, et al. SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process. BMJ Qual Saf 2016; 25: 986–92. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004411.
28.McLeod, H. A review of the evidence on organisational development in healthcare. In: Peck, E, editor. Organisational Development in Healthcare: Approaches, Innovations, Achievements. London: CRC Press; 2004: 247–72.
29.Amess, M, Walshe, K, Shaw, C, Coles, J. Evaluating Audit: The Audit Activities of the Medical Royal Colleges and Their Faculties in England. London: CASPE Research; 1995.
30.Foy R, Ivers N. Audit, feedback, and behaviour change. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; forthcoming.
31.Royal College of Anaesthetists. National Audit Projects (NAPs). www.rcoa.ac.uk/research/research-projects/national-audit-projects-naps (accessed 5 May 2020).
32.Newman, J. Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society. London: Sage; 2001. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446220511.
33.Martin, GP, Currie, G, Finn, R. Leadership, service reform, and public-service networks: the case of cancer-genetics pilots in the English NHS. J Publ Admin Res Theory 2009; 19: 769–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mun016.
34.Addicott, R, McGivern, G, Ferlie, E. The distortion of a managerial technique? The case of clinical networks in UK health care. Br J Manage 2007; 18: 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00494.x.
35.Cropper, S, Hopper, A, Spencer, SA. Managed clinical networks. Arch Dis Child 2002; 87: 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.87.1.1.
36.Addicott, R, McGivern, G, Ferlie, E. Networks, organizational learning and knowledge management: NHS cancer networks. Publ Money Manag 2006; 26: 87–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2006.00506.x.
37.Lave, J, Wenger, EC. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511815355.
38.Wenger, EC, McDermott, R, Snyder, WM. Cultivating Communities of Practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 2002.
39.Kilbride, C, Perry, L, Flatley, M, Turner, E, Meyer, J. Developing theory and practice: creation of a community of practice through action research produced excellence in stroke care. J Interprof Care 2011; 25: 91–7. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2010.483024.
40.Wenger-Trayner, E, Wenger-Trayner, B. Communities of Practice: A Brief Introduction. 2015. https://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/07-Brief-introduction-to-communities-of-practice.pdf (accessed 24 February 2017).
41.Wenger, EC, Snyder, WM. Communities of practice: the organizational frontier. Harvard Bus Rev 2000; 78: 139–45.
42.Toulany, T, Shojania, K. Measurement for improvement. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; forthcoming.
43.Aveling, E-L, Martin, G, Herbert, G, Armstrong, N. Optimising the community-based approach to healthcare improvement: comparative case studies of the clinical community model in practice. Soc Sci Med 2017; 173: 96–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.11.026.
44.Gould, LJ, Wachter, PA, Aboumatar, H, et al. Clinical communities at Johns Hopkins Medicine: an emerging approach to quality improvement. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2015; 41: 387–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1553-7250(15)41050-5.
45.Frank, SM, Thakkar, RN, Podlasek, SJ, et al. Implementing a health system-wide patient blood management program with a clinical community approach. Anesthesiology 2017; 127: 754–64. https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0000000000001851.
46.Radnor, Z, Williams, S. Lean and associated techniques for process improvement. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; forthcoming.
47.Utley, M, Crowe, S, Pagel, C. Operational research approaches. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2022. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009236980.
48.Maben, J, Ball, J, Edmondson, AC. Workplace conditions. In: Dixon-Woods, M, Brown, K, Marjanovic, S, et al., editors. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; forthcoming.
49.Wilson, T, Berwick, DM, Cleary, PD. What do collaborative improvement projects do? Experience from seven countries. Jt Comm J Qual Saf 2004; 30 (suppl): 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1549-3741(04)30106-1.
50.Shaw, EK, Chase, SM, Howard, J, Nutting, PA, Crabtree, BF. More black box to explore: how quality improvement collaboratives shape practice change. J Am Board Fam Med 2012; 25: 149–57. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2012.02.110090.
51.Nadeem, E, Olin, SS, Hill, LC, Hoagwood, KE, Horwitz, SM. Understanding the components of quality improvement collaboratives: a systematic literature review. Milbank Q 2013; 91: 354–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/milq.12016.
52.Wells, S, Tamir, O, Gray, J, et al. Are quality improvement collaboratives effective? A systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf 2018; 27: 226–40. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006926.
53.Kilo, CM. A framework for collaborative improvement: lessons from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s Breakthrough Series. Qual Manage Healthc 1998; 6: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/00019514-199806040-00001.
54.Pronovost, P, Needham, D, Berenholtz, S, et al. An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2725–32. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa061115.
55.Dixon-Woods, M, Bosk, CL, Aveling, EL, Goeschel, CA, Pronovost, PJ. Explaining Michigan: developing an ex post theory of a quality improvement program. Milbank Q 2011; 89: 167–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00625.x.
56.Bion, J, Richardson, A, Hibbert, P, et al. ‘Matching Michigan’: a 2-year stepped interventional programme to minimise central venous catheter-blood stream infections in intensive care units in England. BMJ Qual Saf 2013; 22: 110–23. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001325.
57.Dixon-Woods, M, Leslie, M, Tarrant, C, Bion, J. Explaining Matching Michigan: an ethnographic study of a patient safety program. Implement Sci 2013; 8: 70. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-70.
58.Li, LC, Grimshaw, JM, Nielsen, C, et al. Use of communities of practice in business and health care sectors: a systematic review. Implement Sci 2009; 4: 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-27.
59.Ranmuthugala, G, Plumb, JJ, Cunningham, FC, et al. How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Serv Res 2011; 11: 273. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-273.
60.Barwick, MA, Peters, J, Boydell, K. Getting to uptake: do communities of practice support the implementation of evidence-based practice? J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2009; 18: 16–29. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2651208 (accessed 13 February 2019).
61.Cox, A. What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works. J Inf Sci 2005; 31: 527–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551505057016.
62.Kirkpatrick, I. The worst of both worlds? Public services without markets or bureaucracy. Publ Money Manag 1999; 19: 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9302.00183.
63.Ostrom, E. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990. https://wtf.tw/ref/ostrom_1990.pdf (accessed 14 April 2019).
64.Power, M, Tyrrell, PJ, Rudd, AG, et al. Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial. Implement Sci 2014; 9: 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-40.
65.Carter, P, Ozieranski, P, McNicol, S, Power, M, Dixon-Woods, M. How collaborative are quality improvement collaboratives: a qualitative study in stroke care. Implement Sci 2014; 9: 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-32.
66.Stephens, TJ, Peden, CJ, Pearse, RM, et al. Improving care at scale: process evaluation of a multi-component quality improvement intervention to reduce mortality after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH trial). Implement Sci 2018; 13: 142. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0823-9.
67.Bate, SP, Robert, G. Knowledge management and communities of practice in the private sector: lessons for modernizing the National Health Service in England and Wales. Publ Admin 2002; 80: 643–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00322.
68.Benn, J, Burnett, S, Parand, A, et al. Studying large-scale programmes to improve patient safety in whole care systems: challenges for research. Soc Sci Med 2009; 69: 1767–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.051.
69.Roberts, J. Limits to communities of practice. J Manage Stud 2006; 43: 623–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00618.x.
70.Edwards, N. Clinical networks: advantages include flexibility, strength, speed, and focus on clinical issues. BMJ 2002; 324: 63. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7329.63.
71.Aveling, E-L, Martin, G, García, SJ, et al. Reciprocal peer review for quality improvement: an ethnographic case study of the Improving Lung Cancer Outcomes Project. BMJ Qual Saf 2012; 21: 1034–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-000944.
72.The Health Foundation. Using Clinical Communities to Improve Quality: Ten Lessons for Getting the Clinical Community Approach to Work in Practice. London: The Health Foundation; 2013. www.health.org.uk/publications/using-clinical-communities-to-improve-quality (accessed 5 October 2017).
73.Exworthy, M, Powell, M, Mohan, J. The NHS: quasi-market, quasi-hierarchy and quasi-network? Publ Money Manag 1999; 19: 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9302.00184.
74.The Health Foundation. Effective Networks for Improvement: Developing and Managing Effective Networks to Support Quality Improvement in Healthcare. London: The Health Foundation; 2014. www.health.org.uk/publications/effective-networks-for-improvement (accessed 4 June 2020).

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.