5 de gen. 2025

Research on Integrated Care Systems: workforce


Integrated care systems (ICSs) were given statutory powers and new legal responsibilities for the first time in July 2022 in UK. 

These changes were intended to increase collaboration in the health and social care sector and to enable the NHS, local authorities and other partners to take collective responsibility for improving health outcomes, reducing inequalities, delivering better value for money, and driving local social and economic development. 

This research examines the development of ICSs by assessing their efforts to develop system-wide approaches to the recruitment, training and retention of staff. Workforce issues such as these are currently some of the biggest challenges facing the health and care sector, and require a co-ordinated response from multiple organisations of the kind that ICSs were designed to enable. 

Leading system-wide transformation is slow and the work is hard, but there are clear signs that progress is being made. 

The research identified six distinctive ways in which ICSs are adding value: ◦ organising around a shared purpose ◦ building system leadership ◦ encouraging system-focused behaviours ◦ scaling and spreading success ◦ using resources more effectively ◦ managing complexity. The degree which this is happening varies across systems. 

Despite signs of progress, there is a clear risk of ICSs going ‘off track’ as a result of pressures on services, intense political scrutiny, and extremely difficult economic circumstances – and the effect these conditions are having on the behaviours of leaders locally, regionally and nationally. There is widespread concern that ICSs may not achieve their full potential unless more is done to create an environment conducive to their success. 

The research suggests that success relies primarily on supporting people to think, plan and act in ‘system-focused’ ways. If this is to happen, different behaviours are needed at all levels of the system. National bodies need to create a more enabling environment and ensure that accountability and funding mechanisms support system working. Local leaders need to model system working in their relationships with partners across the system. 

There is considerable interest in how ICSs are performing and there is a danger that attention focuses on the things that are easier to measure. The research suggests that the less visible work of supporting people to work together differently is critical for success and must not be undervalued. The ability to do this well is one of the key factors that will determine whether ICSs succeed in delivering better population health and more joined-up care for people using services.

Kingsfund report ICS, 2024

Photo Jordi SoldevilaIteració de les portes tancades

_______________________________________________________________________

23 de des. 2024

Is competitive pressure essential for sustaining quality in primary care services?

The authors Eduard Brüll, Davud Rostam-Afschar, and Oliver Schlenker study how the threat of entry affects service quantity and quality of general practitioners (GPs).

They leverage Germany’s needs-based primary care planning system, in which the likelihood of new GPs reduces by 20 percentage points when primary care coverage exceeds a cut-off. They compile novel data covering all German primary care regions and up to 30,000 GP-level observations from 2014 to 2019. Reduced threat of entry lowers patient satisfaction for incumbent GPs without nearby competitors but not in areas with competitors. They find no effects on working hours or quality measures at the regional level including hospitalizations and mortality.

While entry restrictions aim to ensure equitable access to care, they can unintentionally reduce service quality by weakening competition. Policymakers must navigate this trade-off carefully, ensuring that access does not come at the expense of quality. By preserving competitive incentives even in regulated markets, healthcare systems can achieve both equitable and high-quality care.

IZA Discussion Paper No. 17534

Access to working paper 2024 (pdf)

Photo Jordi Soldevila. Merry Christmas

_______________________________________________________________________

10 de nov. 2024

València. Building Disaster Resilience: A Systems Approach to Leadership Communication

 

This commentary published by Rand  bMillard McElwee and Monika Cooper last November the 4th (2024), can serve the Spanish authorities (local, autonomous communities and national) to reflect on how to improve the communication of possible disasters such as the one that occurred in València.

Some thoughts: 

"The future of disaster resilience requires us to learn from past political failures, such as the response to Hurricane Katrina, where the lack of clear communication and cohesive narratives deepened mistrust and fragmented communities. 

The inability to align messages across federal, state, and local levels not only delayed critical aid but also exposed the consequences of failing to address social and political divides. 

To move forward, policies must integrate AI and green infrastructure with a focus on rebuilding trust through transparent, unified narratives that guide communities in understanding risks and empowering them to act. Only by bridging these divides can the resilience needed to confront future climate threats be built".

Acces to the commentary: Building disaster resilience

Photo Jordi Soldevila. Geometries de la injustícia

_______________________________________________________________________

20 d’ag. 2024

Centering Equity in the Implementation of Emerging Digital Health Technologies: AI, genomic medicine, digital media

Despite unprecedented spending on health in the United States and the rapid expansion in types and innovations of digital health technologies, many populations still get sick and die at higher rates than others. 

To address these persistent health inequities in the US, it will be crucial to center health equity in the implementation of digital health technologies, such as artificial intelligence or personalized genomic medicine. As the two nascent fields of health equity and digital equity find their footing after rapid implementation and scale-up in the post–coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic world, a focus on equitable implementation is particularly important to ensure that digital health technologies do not perpetuate or create new health inequities. However, to date, these fields have had a limited or siloed focus on equitable implementation.

This paper is the inaugural report in the RAND Center to Advance Racial Equity Policy Methods Volume series. This paper will be the first to center health equity in the implementation of digital health technologies by adapting a methodological framework for its implementation to support the planning and evaluation of digital health technologies. Without an explicit focus on equitable implementation, digital health technologies run the risk of further exacerbating existing health inequities or creating new ones. This paper offers approaches to policymakers, implementation scientists, clinical scientists, government regulatory bodies, and those working in the health and digital technology fields to take the lead in centering equity.

The paper, first describe the persistent health inequities in the United States and how the rapid adoption of digital health technologies can perpetuate those inequities. Then they discuss challenges and limitations of Implementation Science (IS) in centering equity in the rapid adoption of digital health technologies and translating these technologies into equitable improvements in public health. Next, they provide examples of how IS process and evaluation frameworks can be adapted to focus on digital and health equity to leverage emerging health technologies to course correct and address inequitable health outcomes.

Finally, they discuss how these adapted IS process and evaluation frameworks can be applied to address the pitfalls—and realize the promise—of three emerging fields at the intersection of racial and digital health equity: (1) genomic medicine, (2) artificial intelligence (AI) (specifically large language models [LLMs]), and (3) participatory digital media (e.g., blogs, digital stories).

Photo Jordi Soldevila. Gaza. Geometries de la injustícia
_______________________________________________________________________

1 d’ag. 2024

What builds good health? An introduction to the building blocks of health












Health is our most precious asset. Good health and wellbeing enable us to live happy, fulfilling lives and free us up to achieve our potential, supporting positive social and economic outcomes for individuals and society. But we don’t all have the same opportunities to live healthy lives. Right now, in our country, some people are dying years earlier than they should. This isn’t inevitable. There is much we can do to reduce these unfair differences by improving the things that underpin our health.

Many aspects of our lives impact our health and how long we live. These include our jobs and homes, our access to education, public transport and safe green spaces with clean air, and whether we experience poverty or discrimination. These things are often referred to as the ‘wider determinants of health’, and they are all essential building blocks of our health.

Building a healthy society is like constructing a building. To succeed, we need all the right blocks in place. The building blocks of health are: the food we eat; the work; the family, friends and communities; the transport; the housing; the money and resources; the education and skills; and the surroundings.

The The Health Foundation from the UK has published a guide that it is a brief introduction to the building blocks of health. It explains how a person’s opportunity for health is influenced by much more than the NHS, and why people in the UK don’t all have the same chance to be healthy. It also sets out how action to strengthen the building blocks of health can lead to improvements in the health of the whole population, for the benefit of individuals, society and the economy.


Photo Jordi Soldevila. Èxode. Geometries de la injustícia
_______________________________________________________________________

30 de juny 2024

Yes, Minister


Yes, Minister is a British political satire sitcom written by Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn. Comprising three seven-episode series, it was first transmitted on BBC2 from 1980 to 1984. A sequel, Yes, Prime Minister, ran for 16 episodes from 1986 to 1988.

It is a satirical sitcom set in the office of a UK Cabinet minister, Jim Hacker MP, who struggles with Civil Service bureaucracy and political machinations as he tries to get on with government business

Video: Funniest moments 

_______________________________________________________________________