scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Sharon Stevens

Bio: Sharon Stevens is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Psychological resilience & Health care. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 2 publications receiving 29 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify the underlying program theories for the Multispecialty Community Provider (MCP) model of care, identify sources of theoretical, empirical and practice evidence to test the programme theories, and explain how mechanisms used in different contexts contribute to outcomes and process variables.
Abstract: Background The Multispecialty Community Provider (MCP) model was introduced to the NHS as a primary care-led, community-based integrated care model to provide better quality, experience and value for local populations. Objectives The three main objectives were to (1) articulate the underlying programme theories for the MCP model of care; (2) identify sources of theoretical, empirical and practice evidence to test the programme theories; and (3) explain how mechanisms used in different contexts contribute to outcomes and process variables. Design There were three main phases: (1) identification of programme theories from logic models of MCP vanguards, prioritising key theories for investigation; (2) appraisal, extraction and analysis of evidence against a best-fit framework; and (3) realist reviews of prioritised theory components and maps of remaining theory components. Main outcome measures The quadruple aim outcomes addressed population health, cost-effectiveness, patient experience and staff experience. Data sources Searches of electronic databases with forward- and backward-citation tracking, identifying research-based evidence and practice-derived evidence. Review methods A realist synthesis was used to identify, test and refine the following programme theory components: (1) community-based, co-ordinated care is more accessible; (2) place-based contracting and payment systems incentivise shared accountability; and (3) fostering relational behaviours builds resilience within communities. Results Delivery of a MCP model requires professional and service user engagement, which is dependent on building trust and empowerment. These are generated if values and incentives for new ways of working are aligned and there are opportunities for training and development. Together, these can facilitate accountability at the individual, community and system levels. The evidence base relating to these theory components was, for the most part, limited by initiatives that are relatively new or not formally evaluated. Support for the programme theory components varies, with moderate support for enhanced primary care and community involvement in care, and relatively weak support for new contracting models. Strengths and limitations The project benefited from a close relationship with national and local MCP leads, reflecting the value of the proximity of the research team to decision-makers. Our use of logic models to identify theories of change could present a relatively static position for what is a dynamic programme of change. Conclusions Multispecialty Community Providers can be described as complex adaptive systems (CASs) and, as such, connectivity, feedback loops, system learning and adaptation of CASs play a critical role in their design. Implementation can be further reinforced by paying attention to contextual factors that influence behaviour change, in order to support more integrated working. Future work A set of evidence-derived ‘key ingredients’ has been compiled to inform the design and delivery of future iterations of population health-based models of care. Suggested priorities for future research include the impact of enhanced primary care on the workforce, the effects of longer-term contracts on sustainability and capacity, the conditions needed for successful continuous improvement and learning, the role of carers in patient empowerment and how community participation might contribute to community resilience.

20 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This synthesis, an innovative combination of best fit framework synthesis and realist synthesis, will develop a “blueprint” which articulates how and why MCP models work, to inform design of future iterations of the MCP model.
Abstract: NHS England’s Five Year Forward View (NHS England, Five Year Forward View, 2014) formally introduced a strategy for new models of care driven by simultaneous pressures to contain costs, improve care and deliver services closer to home through integrated models. This synthesis focuses on a multispecialty community provider (MCP) model. This new model of care seeks to overcome the limitations in current models of care, often based around single condition-focused pathways, in contrast to patient-focused delivery (Royal College of General Practitioners, The 2022 GP: compendium of evidence, 2012) which offers greater continuity of care in recognition of complex needs and multimorbidity. The synthesis, an innovative combination of best fit framework synthesis and realist synthesis, will develop a “blueprint” which articulates how and why MCP models work, to inform design of future iterations of the MCP model. A systematic search will be conducted to identify research and practice-derived evidence to achieve a balance that captures the historical legacy of MCP models but focuses on contemporary evidence. Sources will include bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, HMIC and Cochrane Library; and grey literature sources. The Best Fit synthesis methodology will be combined with a synthesis following realist principles which are particularly suited to exploring what works, when, for whom and in what circumstances. The aim of this synthesis is to provide decision makers in health and social care with a practical evidence base relating to the multispecialty community provider (MCP) model of care. PROSPERO CRD42016039552 .

16 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: This book will be essential reading for all those who loved (or loathed) the arguments developed in Realistic Evaluation and offers a complete blueprint for research synthesis, supported by detailed illustrations and worked examples from across the policy waterfront.
Abstract: Author Ray Pawson presents a devastating critique of the dominant approach to systematic review namely the 'meta-analytic' approach as sponsored by the Cochrane and Campbell collaborations. In its place is commended an approach that he terms 'realist synthesis'. On this vision, the real purpose of systematic review is better to understand program theory, so that policies Author Ray Pawson presents a devastating critique of the dominant approach to systematic review namely the 'meta-analytic' approach as sponsored by the Cochrane and Campbell collaborations. In its place is commended an approach that he terms 'realist synthesis'. On this vision, the real purpose of systematic review is better to understand program theory, so that policies can be properly targeted and developed to counter an ever-changing landscape of social problems. The book will be essential reading for all those who loved (or loathed) the arguments developed in Realistic Evaluation (Sage, 1997). It offers a complete blueprint for research synthesis, supported by detailed illustrations and worked examples from across the policy waterfront.

1,037 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is proposed that the use of NVivo in realist approaches can help structure the iterative and by nature ‘messy’ process of generating, refining and testing complex programme theories when drawing on multiple data sources simultaneously, which increases its rigour and transparency.
Abstract: There have been several calls for more transparency in realist methods, particularly in the complex process of programme theory development and refinement. This paper will describe the way in which...

48 citations