The framework structures relevant concepts in integrated care for multi-morbidity and can be applied by different stakeholders to guide development, implementation, description, and evaluation.

The implementation of choice for patients over where and when they are seen by specialists in hospital outpatient clinics has been supported by electronic referral systems in England and the Netherlands. This paper compares the implementation of 'Choose and Book' in England and 'ZorgDomein' in a region of the Netherlands. For England the analysis draws on national data and published studies on 'Choose and Book', national patient surveys, and qualitative data based on general practitioner (GP) focus groups. For the Netherlands the analysis draws on qualitative data collected during observational study as well as survey data among patients, GPs and medical specialists. We find that despite significant differences in the genesis and design of the policy, similar challenges have been faced. The electronic referral systems have forced changes to the process of care at the interface between primary and secondary care and standardisation between practices. Although these changes have the potential to generate improvements and benefits, for example, convenience, certainty and choice for patients and efficiency gains through for example reduced do not attend rates, repeat consultations and duplicative diagnostic tests; they have also generated problems during implementation including GP resistance. Policy ambitions for patient choice may not be realised if the implementation of the booking system is not carefully designed and evaluated.

The Netherlands and England are near neighbours whose health care systems have much in common and whose health policy communities have also usually been well aware of what is going on in the other country. Nevertheless, for the two decades from 1982, England adopted and repeatedly redeveloped performance indicator (PI) systems in the health care field while the Netherlands virtually shunned them. A broad institutional explanation for this divergence is provided by England's majoritarian and adversarial political system that leaves governments with fewer constraints and compromises than in the more consociational Dutch system. More recently, however, a Dutch national system of health care PIs has appeared, suggesting that this explanation needs to be supplemented. This paper draws on an empirical study of PI systems in the two countries over the period from 1982 to 2007 to suggest that two further factors are at work. Established institutional patterns may be disrupted by 'punctuations', while technical and political factors endogenous to PI systems may exert a logic of their own.

BackgroundIn health care, many organizations are working on quality improvement and/or innovation of their care practices. Although the effectiveness of improvement processes has been studied extensively, little attention has been given to sustainability of the changed work practices after implementation. The objective of this study is to develop a theoretical framework and measurement instrument for sustainability. To this end sustainability is conceptualized with two dimensions: routinization and institutionalization.MethodsThe exploratory methodological design consisted of three phases: a) framework development; b) instrument development; and c) field testing in former improvement teams in a quality improvement program for health care (N teams = 63, N individual = 112). Data were collected not until at least one year had passed after implementation.Underlying constructs and their interrelations were explored using Structural Equation Modeling and Principal Component Analyses. Internal consistency was computed with Cronbach's alpha coefficient. A long and a short version of the instrument are proposed.ResultsThe χ2- difference test of the -2 Log Likelihood estimates demonstrated that the hierarchical two factor model with routinization and institutionalization as separate constructs showed a better fit than the one factor model (p < .01). Secondly, construct validity of the instrument was strong as indicated by the high factor loadings of the items. Finally, the internal consistency of the subscales was good.ConclusionsThe theoretical framework offers a valuable starting point for the analysis of sustainability on the level of actual changed work practices. Even though the two dimensions routinization and institutionalization are related, they are clearly distinguishable and each has distinct value in the discussion of sustainability. Finally, the subscales conformed to psychometric properties defined in literature. The instrument can be used in the evaluation of improvement projects.

IntroductionNursing homes and home care face challenges across different countries as people are living longer, often with chronic conditions. There is a lack of knowledge regarding implementation and impact of quality and safety interventions as most research evidence so far is generated in hospitals. Additionally, there is a lack of effective leadership tools for quality and safety improvement work in this context.Methods and analysisThe aim of the ‘Improving Quality and Safety in Primary Care—Implementing a Leadership Intervention in Nursing Homes and Homecare’ (SAFE-LEAD) study is to develop and evaluate a research-based leadership guide for managers to increase quality and safety competence. The project applies a mixed-methods design and explores the implications of the leadership guide on managers’ and staffs’ knowledge, attitudes and practices. Four nursing homes and four home care services from different Norwegian municipalities will participate in the intervention. Surveys, process evaluation (interviews, observations) and document analyses will be conducted to evaluate the implementation and impact of the leadership intervention. A comparative study of Norway and the Netherlands will establish knowledge of the context dependency of the intervention.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (2017/52324 and 54855). The results will be disseminated through scientific articles, two PhD dissertations, an anthology, presentations at national and international conferences, and in social media, newsletters and in the press. The results will generate knowledge to inform leadership practices in nursing homes and home care. Moreover, the study will build new theory on leadership interventions and the role of contextual factors in nursing homes and home care.