Health Policy Monitor
Skip Navigation

NSW Chronic Care Collaboratives

Country: 
Australien
Partner Institute: 
Centre for Health, Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology, Sydney
Survey no: 
(6)2005
Author(s): 
Marion Haas
Health Policy Issues: 
Organisation/Integration des Systems, Qualitätsverbesserung, Zugang
Current Process Stages
Idee Pilotprojekt Strategiepapier Gesetzgebung Umsetzung Evaluation Veränderung/Richtungswechsel
Implemented in this survey? nein nein nein nein ja ja nein
Featured in half-yearly report: G-politik in Industrieländern 6

Abstract

The NSW Chronic Care Collaborative involved 22 teams representing 18 Area Health Services in NSW. Collaborative methodology identified, disseminated and implemented best practice for Heart Failure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Lessons learned from both successful and unsuccessful interventions have been an important outcome for teams and others undertaking improvement work. A formal evaluation of the Collaborative has been undertaken.

Purpose of health policy or idea

The NSW Chronic Care Collaborative involved 22 teams representing 18 Area Health Services across NSW. These teams were representative of a wide range of health care providers including General Practitioners and consumers. They used the collaborative methodology to facilitate the identification, dissemination and implementation of best practice for patients with Heart Failure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in a range of settings over a period of approximately 12 months.

A formal evaluation of the Collaborative has been undertaken. It is anticipated that improvements achieved as a result of collaborative interventions will help to reduce hospital admissions/readmissions for people with these chronic conditions. It is also anticipated that the processes established for enhanced management of people with heart failure and COPD will be transferable for managing other chronic diseases.

Main points

Main objectives

The aim of the NSW Chronic Care Collaborative was to implement a collaborative methodology to facilitate the identification, dissemination and implementation of best practice for patients with Heart Failure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in a range of settings over a period of approximately 12 months.

Type of incentives

NSW Health provided financial incentives of $26,000 to each Area Health Service (AHS) in the State for project support and GP involvement in relation to the setting up of teams to address AHS-specific issues related to both HF and COPD. All AHS were represented in the Collaborative although not all addressed both health conditions.

Groups affected

Providers of care in NSW, Patients with chronic conditions

 Suchhilfe

Characteristics of this policy

Innovationsgrad traditionell recht traditionell innovativ
Kontroversität unumstritten kaum umstritten kontrovers
Strukturelle Wirkung marginal neutral fundamental
Medienpräsenz sehr gering gering sehr hoch
Übertragbarkeit sehr systemabhängig systemneutral systemneutral

As the methodology has been in use in a number of countries, it cannot be considered as particularly innovative. There is evidence that its implementation was consensual. As a local initiative, it is likely to be neutral with regard to its impact on the healthcare system as a whole. Although over time it may have a greater impact than this. It was not visible to the general public and, as is obvious, is transferable between healthcare systems.

Political and economic background

This activity reflects initiatives being undertaken at the national level through the National Health Priorities Action Council (NHPAC) which is a sub-committee of the Australian Health Ministers' Advisory Council (AHMAC), established in 2000 and given the responsibility of facilitating improvements in health services to achieve better health outcomes in the national priority areas (which include cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, asthma, mental health, arthritis, musculosketal conditions and injury prevention).

Change based on an overall national health policy statement

National Health Priorities

Purpose and process analysis

Current Process Stages

Idee Pilotprojekt Strategiepapier Gesetzgebung Umsetzung Evaluation Veränderung/Richtungswechsel
Implemented in this survey? nein nein nein nein ja ja nein

Origins of health policy idea

The idea was one of a series of initiatives designed by the Department of Health in NSW to address the issue of how the health system will best be able to meet the challange of improving care provided to people with chronic conditions.

The tool used in this instance was a methodology developed in the USA and used in UK, USA and Scandinavian countries - the Collaborative change management methodology. Thus, although this represents a new approach for NSW, it is not new overall.

The Collaborative methodology, designed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement in the USA, provides a generic quality improvement model that can be applied to achieve small, rapid and locally relevant improvements across a broad range of clinical and practice business issues. The Collaborative methodology has successfully delivered improvements in care for patients with asthma, diabetes, coronary heart disease and cancer in the primary health care setting in the US, UK and Europe. It represents a successful body of work that can be adapted to achieve the aims of the Australian Primary Care Collaboratives Program. The key topic areas for the Australian Program are diabetes, cardiovascular disease and access to general practice.

The Collaboratives are implemented in "waves", where one "wave" is defined as one orientation session and three learning workshops with periods of participant activity (action periods) between each and followed by activities to spread the learnings to others.

Initiators of idea/main actors

  • Leistungserbringer: NSW provides mainly hospital employees were the main players

Approach of idea

The approach of the idea is described as:
renewed: USA

Stakeholder positions

As an initiative of the Health Department, a number of policy and position papers are available which report on the broad policy approach which underpins the Collaborative concept. However, a specific publication about the implementation and evaluation of the program is not yet available. It is not clear that there were any opponents to the idea or that conflicts arose which required mediation.

Actors and positions

Description of actors and their positions
Leistungserbringer
Hospital-based providerssehr unterstützendunterstützend stark dagegen
GPssehr unterstützendneutral stark dagegen
Consumerssehr unterstützendneutral stark dagegen

Influences in policy making and legislation

n/a

Actors and influence

Description of actors and their influence

Leistungserbringer
Hospital-based providerssehr großneutral kein
GPssehr großgroß kein
Consumerssehr großneutral kein
Hospital-based providersConsumersGPs

Positions and Influences at a glance

Graphical actors vs. influence map representing the above actors vs. influences table.

Adoption and implementation

The 22 teams from 18 AHS used the Collaborative methodology as described below. The methodology for this particular use was based on the premise that best practice related to the performance of a range of diagnostic and management interventions drawn from the NSW Health Respiratory and Heart Failure Clinical Service Frameworks and Aboriginal Chronic Desease Service Frameworks. Teams implemented a range of successful interventions that have been spread more broadly to achieve statewide improvements in management of those disease groups. Many of the initiatives have application for Chronic Disease Management more generally. Lessons learned from both successful and unsuccessful interventions have been an important outcome for teams and others undertaking improvement work.

The program involved an orientation session and then four learning sessions held during 2004. At each learning session, the participants presented the results of the processes they had undertaken and received instructions and advice about the next set of processes they would be required to undertake.

Monitoring and evaluation

A formal evaluation of the Collaborative has been undertaken. It is anticipated that improvements achieved as a result of collaborative interventions will help to reduce hospital admissions/readmissions for people with these chronic conditions. It is also anticipated that the processes established for enhanced management of people with heart failure and COPD will be transferable for managing other chronic diseases. The NSW Chronic Care Program, through the Chronic Care Unit at NSW Health, will facilitate the sustainability of improvements made within the Collaborative.

The report detailing the results of the evaluation is not yet available.

Results of evaluation

Not yet available. However the process of implementation and some self-reflective evaluation of individual projects are available on the dedicated website (see below).

Expected outcome

The objective in instigating a Collaborative methodology has been successful as 22 teams from 18 AHS participated in and completed a series of tasks aimed at improving the management of people with heart failure or COPD.

As this initiative is specific both in terms of the methodology used and the conditions targeted, it is likely that it will achieve its objectives as listed below. The presentations from teams indicated that they were generally successful in increasing the proportion of people with COPD or Heart Failure at a designated community health service point, who have previously had the complete diagnostic bundle and the complete management bundle, increasing the proportion of people with COPD or Heart Failure presenting to Emergency Department, discharged from hospital who have previously had the complete management bundle and with whom advanced care directives have previously been discussed. The extent to which each team was successful varied.

Overall, it is clear that this initiative improved the quality of care. It may also have improved access to care as GPs as well as hospital clinicians were involved from every AHS in NSW. However, it is not clear how widespread the involvement of GPs was. Nor is it clear how long-lasting the changes in clinical practice will be - some teams identified problems in attitudes to change at local clinical levels. There has been no evaluation of the extent to which changes in practice have impacted on the costs of providing care at either the hospital or GP level.

Impact of this policy

Qualität kaum Einfluss relativ starker Einfluss starker Einfluss
Gerechtigkeit System weniger gerecht four System gerechter
Kosteneffizienz sehr gering neutral sehr hoch

As this methodology seeks to implement changes to practice at the most fundamental level, if successfully implemented, widely adopted and sustained, it is likely to lead to significant improvements in care for people with chronic conditions. If the above conditions (ie successful implementation, widespread adoption and sustained action) are met, it may also have an impact of equity in terms of both access to care and outcomes. There is no evidence available which would allow an evaluation of the probable impact on costs of care or efficiency.

References

Sources of Information

Collaborative methodology: www.npdt.org/scripts/default.asp?site_id=1&Id=9748

www.ihi.org/IHI/Products/WhitePapers/TheBreakthroughSeriesIHIsCollaborativeModelforAchieving%20BreakthroughImprovement

NSW Health. Chronic and Complex Care publications: www.health.nsw.gov.au/sd/igfs/hp/resources/

Website for the NSW Health Chronic Care Collaborative: www.health.nsw.gov.au/sd/igfs/hp/ccc/index.html

 

Author/s and/or contributors to this survey

Marion Haas

Empfohlene Zitierweise für diesen Online-Artikel:

Marion Haas. "NSW Chronic Care Collaboratives". Health Policy Monitor, October 2005. Available at http://www.hpm.org/survey/au/a6/4