Is the Kaiser Permanente Model Superior in Terms of Clinical Integration?: A Comparative Study of Kaiser Permanente, Northern California and the Danish Healthcare System

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Is the Kaiser Permanente Model Superior in Terms of Clinical Integration?: A Comparative Study of Kaiser Permanente, Northern California and the Danish Healthcare System

Citable link to this page

. . . . . .

Title: Is the Kaiser Permanente Model Superior in Terms of Clinical Integration?: A Comparative Study of Kaiser Permanente, Northern California and the Danish Healthcare System
Author: Strandberg-Larsen, Martin; Schiøtz, Michaela L; Silver, Jeremy D; Frølich, Anne; Andersen, John S; Graetz, Ilana; Bellows, Jim; Krasnik, Allan; Rundall, Thomas; Reed, Mary Elizabeth; Hsu, John

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Strandberg-Larsen, Martin, Michaela L. Schiøtz, Jeremy D. Silver, Anne Frølich, John S. Andersen, Ilana Graetz, Mary Reed, et al. 2010. Is the Kaiser Permanente model superior in terms of clinical integration?: a comparative study of Kaiser Permanente, Northern California and the Danish healthcare system. BMC Health Services Research 10:91.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: Background: Integration of medical care across clinicians and settings could enhance the quality of care for patients. To date, there is limited data on the levels of integration in practice. Our objective was to compare primary care clinicians' perceptions of clinical integration and three sub-aspects in two healthcare systems: Kaiser Permanente, Northern California (KPNC) and the Danish healthcare system (DHS). Further, we examined the associations between specific organizational factors and clinical integration within each system. Methods: Comparable questionnaires were sent to a random sample of primary care clinicians in KPNC (n = 1103) and general practitioners in DHS (n = 700). Data were analysed using multiple logistic regression models. Results: More clinicians in KPNC perceived to be part of a clinical integrated environment than did general practitioners in the DHS (OR = 3.06, 95% CI: 2.28, 4.12). Further, more KPNC clinicians reported timeliness of information transfer (OR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.62, 3.13), agreement on roles and responsibilities (OR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.30, 2.47) and established coordination mechanisms in place to ensure effective handoffs (OR = 6.80, 95% CI: 4.60, 10.06). None of the considered organizational factors in the sub-country analysis explained a substantial proportion of the variation in clinical integration. Conclusions: More primary care clinicians in KPNC reported clinical integration than did general practitioners in the DHS. Focused measures of clinical integration are needed to develop the field of clinical integration and to create the scientific foundation to guide managers searching for evidence based approaches.
Published Version: doi:10.1186/1472-6963-10-91
Other Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2907761/pdf/
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/10/91
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:4742700

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters