A Framework to Support the Progressive Implementation of Integrated Team-Based Care for the Management of COPD: A Collective Case Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: In Canada, there is consensus about the need for integrated, team-based care in primary care settings to help manage chronic conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Currently, there is limited understanding on how to support the continued growth and spread of such models; this is coupled with the fact that there is limited empirical evidence to support this process within chronic disease management. There is a need to understand how to support the implementation and spread of integrated, team-based chronic disease management programs in primary care settings, a process that we call progressive implementation. Methods: We studied the supporting and mitigating factors required to successfully implement and spread an integrated, team-based program for COPD management in primary care. We conducted a collective case study using an integrated knowledge translation approach involving key informants and our patient partner throughout the entire research process. Data collection included interviews, living documents, and a focus group. Our study explored an integrated, team-based model of care for COPD known as Best Care COPD (BCC). The BCC program has been implemented in primary care settings across Southwestern Ontario. BCC is a quality improvement initiative that was developed to enhance the quality of care for patients with COPD. Participants in our research included healthcare providers involved in the delivery of the BCC program. Results: We identified mechanisms influencing the spread of BCC and categorized them as foundational (evidence-based program, readiness to implement and a peer-led implementation team), transformative (adaptive process, provider empowerment and embedded evaluation), and enabling mechanisms (provider training, administrative support, role clarity, and patient outcomes) across three different implementation phases. We developed a framework to inform the progressive implementation of integrated, team-based care for chronic disease management within primary care settings. Conclusions: This study explores the implementation and spread of an integrated team-based COPD management program in primary care settings. Despite using COPD management program in Ontario, Canada as an exemplar, we believe the findings can be applied in other chronic disease contexts in primary care settings around the world. We provide a framework to support progressive implementation of integrated team-based care for chronic diseases with the potential to support patients and providers by understanding how to facilitate the continued growth of appropriate models of care. Next Steps: The rapidly increasing prevalence of chronic diseases emphasizes the need to understand how to spread and sustain appropriate models of care to better support patients and providers. The next phase of this study will seek to understand how to support the sustainability of integrated, team-based chronic disease management programs in a primary care setting. Information on Financial Support: This study has received financial support from the Asthma Research Group Inc. and Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,058 | 0,036 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,022 | 0,029 |
| Communication savante | 0,015 | 0,013 |
| Science ouverte | 0,008 | 0,018 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,010 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».