Limits...
Providing supportive care to cancer patients: a study on inter-organizational relationships.

Brazil K, Bainbridge D, Sussman J, Whelan T, O'Brien MA, Pyette N - Int J Integr Care (2008)

Bottom Line: Network analysis revealed a diffuse system where centralization was greater in operational than administrative activities.A greater number of provider cliques were present at the operational level than the administrative level.Our results point to the importance of developing a better understanding on the types of relationships that exist among service programs if effective integrated models of care are to be developed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: St. Joseph's Health System Research Network, Supportive Care Research Unit, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

ABSTRACT

Background: Supportive cancer care (SCC) has historically been provided by organizations that work independently and possess limited inter-organizational coordination. Despite the recognition that SCC services must be better coordinated, little research has been done to examine inter-organizational relationships that would enable this goal.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe relationships among programs that support those affected by cancer. Through this description the study objective was to identify the optimal approach to coordinating SCC in the community.

Methods: Senior administrators in programs that provided care to persons and their families living with or affected by cancer participated in a personal interview.

Setting: South-central Ontario, Canada.

Study population: administrators from 43 (97%) eligible programs consented to participate in the study.

Results: Network analysis revealed a diffuse system where centralization was greater in operational than administrative activities. A greater number of provider cliques were present at the operational level than the administrative level. Respondents identified several priorities to improve the coordination of cancer care in the community including: improving standards of care; establishing a regional coordinating body; increasing resources; and improving communication between programs.

Conclusion: Our results point to the importance of developing a better understanding on the types of relationships that exist among service programs if effective integrated models of care are to be developed.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Overall administrative relationships.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2254486&req=5

fg001: Overall administrative relationships.

Mentions: An additional way the data were presented was through the use of the plotting subroutine of UCINET 5. The plots are graphic representations of the programs involved in the Niagara service system (a numbered node representing each program), showing who is connected to whom through lines between the nodes. For the plots shown (Figures 1 and 2), the connecting lines also have arrows—unidirectional indicating a one way relationship (e.g. a referral either sent or received) between programs or bidirectional (e.g. referrals both sent and received) indicating a reciprocated relationship between programs.


Providing supportive care to cancer patients: a study on inter-organizational relationships.

Brazil K, Bainbridge D, Sussman J, Whelan T, O'Brien MA, Pyette N - Int J Integr Care (2008)

Overall administrative relationships.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2254486&req=5

fg001: Overall administrative relationships.
Mentions: An additional way the data were presented was through the use of the plotting subroutine of UCINET 5. The plots are graphic representations of the programs involved in the Niagara service system (a numbered node representing each program), showing who is connected to whom through lines between the nodes. For the plots shown (Figures 1 and 2), the connecting lines also have arrows—unidirectional indicating a one way relationship (e.g. a referral either sent or received) between programs or bidirectional (e.g. referrals both sent and received) indicating a reciprocated relationship between programs.

Bottom Line: Network analysis revealed a diffuse system where centralization was greater in operational than administrative activities.A greater number of provider cliques were present at the operational level than the administrative level.Our results point to the importance of developing a better understanding on the types of relationships that exist among service programs if effective integrated models of care are to be developed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: St. Joseph's Health System Research Network, Supportive Care Research Unit, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

ABSTRACT

Background: Supportive cancer care (SCC) has historically been provided by organizations that work independently and possess limited inter-organizational coordination. Despite the recognition that SCC services must be better coordinated, little research has been done to examine inter-organizational relationships that would enable this goal.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe relationships among programs that support those affected by cancer. Through this description the study objective was to identify the optimal approach to coordinating SCC in the community.

Methods: Senior administrators in programs that provided care to persons and their families living with or affected by cancer participated in a personal interview.

Setting: South-central Ontario, Canada.

Study population: administrators from 43 (97%) eligible programs consented to participate in the study.

Results: Network analysis revealed a diffuse system where centralization was greater in operational than administrative activities. A greater number of provider cliques were present at the operational level than the administrative level. Respondents identified several priorities to improve the coordination of cancer care in the community including: improving standards of care; establishing a regional coordinating body; increasing resources; and improving communication between programs.

Conclusion: Our results point to the importance of developing a better understanding on the types of relationships that exist among service programs if effective integrated models of care are to be developed.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus