Background The COVID-19 pandemic affects the processes of routine care for chronic patients. A better understanding helps to increase resilience of the health system and prepare adequately for next waves of the pandemic. Methods A qualitative study was conducted in 16 primary care practices: 6 solo working, 4 monodisciplinary and 7 multidisciplinary. Twenty-one people (doctors, nurses, dieticians) were interviewed, using semi-structured video interviews. A thematic analysis was done using the domains of the Chronic Care Model (CCM). Results Three themes emerged: changes in health care organization, risk stratification and self-management support. All participating practices reported drastic changes in organization with a collective shift towards COVID-19 care, and reduction of chronic care activities, less consultations, and staff responsible for self-management support put on hold. A transition to digital support did not occur. Few practitioners had a systematic approach to identify and contact high-risk patients for early follow-up. A practice with a pre-established structured team collaboration managed to continue most chronic care elements. Generally, practitioners expected no effects of the temporary disruption for patients, although they expressed concern about patients already poorly regulated. Conclusion Our findings show a disruption of the delivery of chronic care in the Belgium prim care context. In such contexts, the establishment of the CCM can facilitate continuity of care in crisis times. Short term actions should be directed to facilitate identifying high-risk patients and to develop a practice organization plan to organize chronic care and use digital channels for support, especially to vulnerable patients, during next waves of the epidemic.

Health systems worldwide struggle to manage the growing burden of type 2 diabetes and hypertension. Many patients receive suboptimal care, especially those most vulnerable. An evidence-based Integrated Care Package (ICP) with primary care-based diagnosis, treatment, education and self-management support and collaboration, leads to better health outcomes, but there is little knowledge of how to scale-up. The Scale-up integrated care for diabetes and hypertension project (SCUBY) aims to address this problem by roadmaps for scaling-up ICP in different types of health systems: a developing health system in a lower middle-income country (Cambodia); a centrally steered health system in a high-income country (Slovenia); and a publicly funded highly privatised health-care health system in a high-income country (Belgium). In a quasi-experimental multi-case design, country-specific scale-up strategies are developed, implemented and evaluated. A three-dimensional framework assesses scale-up along three axes: (1) increase in population coverage; (2) expansion of the ICP package; and (3) integration into the health system. The study includes a formative, intervention and evaluation phase. The intervention entails the development and implementation of an improved scale-up strategy through a roadmap with a minimum dataset to monitor proximal and distal outcomes. The SCUBY project is expected to result in three different roadmaps, tailored to the specific health system and country context, to progress scale-up of the ICP along three dimensions. These roadmaps can be adapted to other health systems with similar typology. Implementation is expected to increase the number of well-controlled patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension in Cambodia, to reduce inequities in care and increase patient empowerment in Belgium and Slovenia.

Background: Globally, health systems have been struggling to cope with the increasing burden of chronic diseases and respond to associated patient needs. Integrated care (IC) for chronic diseases offers solutions, but implementing these new models requires multi-stakeholder action and integrated policies to address social, organisational, and financial barriers. Policy implementation for IC has been little studied, especially through a political lens. This paper examines how IC policies in Belgium were developed over the last decade and how stakeholders have played a role in these policies. Methods: We used a case study design. After an exploratory document review, we selected three IC policies. We then interviewed 25 key stakeholders in the field of IC. The stakeholder analysis entailed a detailed mapping of the stakeholders' power, position, and interest related to the three selected policies. Interview participants included policy-makers, civil servants (from ministry of health and health insurance), representatives of health professionals' associations, academics, and patient organisations. Additionally, a processual analysis of IC policy processes (2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)(2019)(2020) through literature review was used to frame the interviews by means of a chronic care policy timeline. Results: In Belgium, a variety of policy initiatives have been developed in recent years both at central and decentralised levels. The power analysis and policy position maps exposed tensions between federal and federated governments in terms of overlapping competence, as well as the implications of the power shift from federal to federated levels as a consequence of the 2014 state reform. Conclusion:The 2014 partial decentralisation of healthcare has created fragmentation of decisive power which undermines efforts towards IC. This political trend towards fragmentation is at odds with the need for IC. Further research is needed on how public health policy competences and reform durability of IC policies will evolve.

No abstract