The need for theory-based evaluation of care coordination initiatives: Considerations from the 2017 International Conference on Realist Research,Evaluation and Synthesis
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2018
The need for theory-based evaluation of care coordination initiatives: Considerations from the 2017 International Conference on Realist Research,Evaluation and Synthesis
Research in the field of care coordination faces the challenge of providing transferable explanatory insights regarding what principles and initiatives work in practice and why. Such insights are crucial in developing effective solutions for global disease burdens. Realist research approaches have demonstrated potential to deliver stronger theoretical contributions of evaluation studies across fields of research. These were discussed at the International Conference for Realist Research, Evaluation and Synthesis in Brisbane (from 24 to 26 October 2017). This paper provides an overview and reflection on the conference by four participants. It focuses on (1) topical debates and challenges for the application of realistic methodology in health services research, as presented at the conference and (2) implied opportunities and challenges for (realist) evaluation of care coordination initiatives. Based on the reflections, future realist evaluation on evaluating complex care coordination initiatives is recommended.
SuterEOelkeNDAdairCEet al.
Ten key principles for successful health systems integration. Healthc Q2009;
13: 16
2.
BusettoLLuijkxKGElissenAMJet al.
Context, mechanisms and outcomes of integrated care for diabetes mellitus type 2: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;
16: 18
3.
Martínez-GonzálezNABerchtoldPUllmanKet al.
Integrated care programmes for adults with chronic conditions: a meta-review.Int J Qual Health Care2014;
26: 561–570.
4.
OuwensMWollersheimHHermensRet al.
Integrated care programmes for chronically ill patients: a review of systematic reviews. Int J Qual Health Care2005;
17: 141–146.
5.
BusettoLLuijkxKVrijhoefB.Development of the COMIC Model for the comprehensive evaluation of integrated care interventions. Int J Integr Care2017;
17: A28200.
6.
Van HoudtSHeyrmanJVanhaechtKet al.
An in-depth analysis of theoretical frameworks for the study of care coordination. Int J Integr Care. 2013;
13.
7.
AllenDGillenERixsonL.Systematic review of the effectiveness of integrated care pathways: what works, for whom, in which circumstances?.Int J Evid Based Healthc2009;
7: 61–74.
8.
KirstMImJBurnsTet al.
What works in implementation of integrated care programs for older adults with complex needs? A realist review. Int J Qual Health Care2017;
29: 612–624.
9.
MooreGFAudreySBarkerMet al.
Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ2015;
350: h1258
10.
CartwrightNHardieJ.Evidence-based policy: a practical guide to doing it better.
Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press, 2012.
11.
ShiellAHawePGoldL.Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation. BMJ2008;
336: 1281
12.
OrganizationWH.Modern health care delivery systems, care coordination and the role of hospitals.
Copenhagen, Denmark:
WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2012.
13.
SchultzEMMcDonaldKM.What is care coordination?Int J Care Coord2014;
17: 5–24.
14.
O’malleyASGrossmanJMCohenGRet al.
Are electronic medical records helpful for care coordination? Experiences of physician practices. J Gen Intern Med2010;
25: 177–185.
15.
WaibelSHenaoDAllerMBet al.
What do we know about patients' perceptions of continuity of care? A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. Int J Qual Health Care2011;
24: 39–48.
16.
PawsonR.The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto:
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage; 2013.
17.
WongGWesthorpGManzanoAet al.
RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations. BMC Med2016;
14: 96
18.
MarchalBvan BelleSvan OlmenJet al.
Is realist evaluation keeping its promise? A review of published empirical studies in the field of health systems research. Evaluation2012;
18: 192–212.
19.
TilleyN. Realistic evaluation: Origins and destinations. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
20.
PawsonR. Seven challenges for realist evaluation and realist synthesis: seven tasks for the conference!. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia; 24–26 October 2017.
21.
BhaskarR.The possibility of naturalism (
vol.i).
Abingdon, UK:
Routledge, 1979.
22.
HawkinsAJ.Realist evaluation and randomised controlled trials for testing program theory in complex social systems. Evaluation2016;
22: 270–285.
23.
PorterSMcConnellTClarkeMet al.
A critical realist evaluation of a music therapy intervention in palliative care. BMC Palliat Care2017;
16: 70
24.
HawkinsA. Testing realist program theory – quantitative and qualitative impact evaluation. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
25.
PorterS. Critical realist randomised controlled trials: theory, method and application. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
World Health Organization. WHO framework on integrated people-centred health services, 2016.
Geneva:
WHO, 2017.
28.
HawkinsP. Realist evaluation in the real world. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
29.
BoumansJBoekelLBaanCAet al. Maintaining self-determination for people with dementia living in residential care facilities: state of the art and preliminary results. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
30.
JamiesonLMParadiesYCEadesSet al.
Ten principles relevant to health research among Indigenous Australian populations. Med J Aust2012;
197: 16–18.
31.
PylypchukGVincentLWentworthJet al.
Diabetes risk evaluation and microalbuminuria (DREAM) studies: ten years of participatory research with a first nation’s home and community model for type 2 diabetes care in Northern Saskatchewan. Int J Circumpolar Health2008;
67: 190–202.
32.
RogersP. Communicating complication and complexity. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
33.
FrancisGWesthorpG. No ‘Silver Bullets’: learning from realist evaluation in an education context. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
34.
MiddletonLCummingJ. Realist evaluation results: enlightening or too nuanced? In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
35.
WilliamsEKennedyJ. Useful (or not) for whom, in what respects, why?: reflections on the utility of a realist evaluation at multiple levels. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
DalkinS.The realist evaluation of a palliative integrated care pathway in primary care: what works, for whom and in what circumstances? PhD Thesis, Northumbria University, UK, 2014.
38.
VargasIMogollón-PérezASDe PaepePet al.
Do existing mechanisms contribute to improvements in care coordination across levels of care in health services networks? Opinions of the health personnel in Colombia and Brazil. BMC Health Serv Res2015;
15: 213.
39.
KirstMImJBurnsTet al.
What works in implementation of integrated care programs for older adults with complex needs? A realist review. Int J Qual Health Care2017;
29: 612–624.
40.
DurhamJ. The role of qualitative interviews in assembling, refining and consolidating program theory. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
41.
McKayAKinsmanLMcCaanD. Complexity of decision making in healthcare: What method of data collection would be most effective in realist research and evaluation. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
42.
LevayA. In what contexts and to what degree does (which) qualitative software package work for realist analysis? In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
43.
DalkinSForsterNHodgsonPet al. Use of NVivo in a realist evaluation; an interactive skills based workshop. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
44.
MaxwellJ. Using qualitative research in realist evaluation. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
45.
EastwoodJ. Social exclusion, infant behaviour, social isolation, and maternal expectations independently predict maternal depressive symptoms: a realist non-linear principal component analysis. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
46.
KingJWalshBWesthorpGet al. Realist economic evaluation. In: Presentation at the international conference on realist research, evaluation and synthesis, Brisbane, Australia, 24–26 October 2017.
