The aim of this paper is to set the foundation for subsequent empirical studies of the “Implementing models of primary care for older adults with complex needs” project, by introducing and presenting a brief descriptive comparison of the nine case studies in Quebec, Ontario and New Zealand. Each case is described based on key dimensions of Rainbow model of Valentijn and al (2013) with a focus on “meso level” integration. Meso level integration is represented by organizational and professional elements of the Rainbow Model, which are of particular interest in our nine case studies. Each of the three cases in Ontario and three in New Zealand are different and described separately. In Quebec, a local health services network model is presented across the three cases studied with variations in the way it is implemented. The three cases selected in the three jurisdictions under study were not chosen to be representative of wider practice within each country, but rather represent interesting and unique models of community-based primary healthcare integration. Similarities and variations in the integrated care models, context and dimension of integration offer insights regarding core component of integration of services, offering a foundational understanding of the cases on which future analysis will be based.

ContextTwo reforms (2014, 2015) characterised by the merger of public health care establishments profoundly shaped the current organisation of Quebec’s healthcare system. In 2015, 22 megastructures called Integrated Health and Social Services Centres/Integrated University Health and Social Services Centres (IHSSC/IUHSSC), were created and mandated to organise care delivery to their local populations.ObjectiveTo describe the service configuration of the 2015 healthcare system reforms, emphasising on how it shaped the organisation of primary health care (PHC) in Quebec.ResultsWith the creation of IHSSCs/IUHSSCs, Quebec’s healthcare system passed from three to two levels of governance, leading to a centralisation of decision-making powers. Most health services are delivered by the new organisations, while most PHC is delivered by semi-private medical practices, mainly Family Medicine Groups (FMGs). The FMG model is the preferred strategy to develop interdisciplinary team-work and inter-organizational collaborations with other PHC services.Conclusionmechanisms through which centralised healthcare systems achieve community oriented integrated care (COIC) need to be properly understood in order to improve meaningful clinical outcomes. Mergers may not sufficiently achieve integration of services in all its dimensions. These reforms should be monitored and evaluated on their capacity to mobilise all providers as well as physicians to participate in COIC.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction:In many countries, integrated care has been implemented to improve the quality, efficiency and patient experience of services. Understanding how integrated care is adopted in different settings may give insights into where, how and why different components of the organisational design work. The aim of this article is to understand how and why integrated care for older people has been implemented in different contexts from the perspective of providers.Theory and methods:The study uses an innovative composite framework for the implementation of integrated care models, which posits that structural, organisational, provider, innovation and patient factors influence implementation along six dimensions of integration. A qualitative multiple case study was done of three cases in Québec using document analysis and semi-structured interviews of 28 providers. Descriptive comparisons and thematic analysis were performed.Results:Providers considered that structural (government policy) and organisational (mergers) factors highly influenced the implementation of organisational and functional dimensions of integration, at the detriment of clinical integration. Provider, innovation and patient factors mildly or moderately influenced the implementation of integration.Conclusion:Structural and organisational factors were necessary conditions for the implementation of administrative components of integration, with great variability in the implementation of some clinical components.