Bridging gaps to promote networked care between teams and groups in health delivery systems: a systematic review of non-health literature

Abstract

ObjectivesTo assess non-health literature, identify key strategies in promoting more networked teams and groups, apply external ideas to healthcare, and build a model based on these strategies.DesignA systematic review of the literature outside of healthcare.MethodSearches guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) of ABI/INFORM Global, CINAHL, IBSS, MEDLINE and Psychinfo databases following a mind-mapping exercise generating key terms centred on the core construct of gaps across organisational social structures that uncovered 842 empirical articles of which 116 met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction and content analysis via data mining techniques were performed on these articles.ResultsThe research involved subjects in 40 countries, with 32 studies enrolling participants in multiple countries. There were 40 studies conducted wholly or partly in the USA, 46 wholly or partly in continental Europe, 29 wholly or partly in Asia and 12 wholly or partly in Russia or Russian federated countries. Methods employed included 30 mixed or triangulated social science study designs, 39 qualitative studies, 13 experimental studies and 34 questionnaire-based studies, where the latter was mostly to gather data for social network analyses. Four recurring factors underpin a model for promoting networked behaviours and fortifying cross-group cooperation: appreciating the characteristics and nature of gaps between groups; using the leverage of boundary-spanners to bridge two or more groups; applying various mechanisms to stimulate interactive relationships; and mobilising those who can exert positive external influences to promote connections while minimising the impact of those who exacerbate divides.ConclusionsThe literature assessed is rich and varied. An evidence-oriented model and strategies for promoting more networked systems are now available for application to healthcare. While caution needs to be exercised in translating outside ideas and studies, drawing on non-health ideas is useful in providing insights into other sectors.

The basis of clinical tribalism, hierarchy and stereotyping: a laboratory-controlled teamwork experiment

“…Teamwork : The combined activities of a group of people working effectively towards common ends. 9 Tribe : An in-group exhibiting strong bonds with tendencies towards inward social loyalty and conformity across the membership.…”

Patient and Public Involvement in doctoral research: Reflections and experiences of the PPI contributors and researcher

“…The results highlight that PPI improved and contributed to study recruitment and participation similar to the extant literature. [29][30] PPI also had an impact on research quality and relevance (e.g. appropriateness of the interview schedule), the researcher and the contributors themselves.…”

A systems science perspective on the capacity for change in public hospitals

“…In complex systems, there are identifiable stakeholder types, most of whom come from the coal-face clinical groups and are scattered across various low-level layers of the organisation who have a say, and exercise control over change, progress, and pace of adoption. They go by many names, including opinion leaders, mavens, bridges, liaisons, tertius gaudens , tertius iungens , connectors, and cosmopolites [17]. As well as being a product of the culture, individuals in these roles shape, guide or nudge it, thereby determining, through their interactions, the properties of the system [16].…”