Elsevier

Applied Ergonomics

Volume 84, April 2020, 103023
Applied Ergonomics

A practical model for research with learning health systems: Building and implementing effective complex case management

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103023Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Identify a critical question that is a high priority for the health system.

  • Conduct research and evaluation based on organizational priorities.

  • Share results so the research and evaluation activities reach key stakeholders.

  • Implement change based on research results to achieve system-wide approval.

Abstract

For researchers to contribute meaningfully to the creation of learning health systems, practical tools are required to operationalize existing conceptual frameworks. We describe a model currently in use by the University of Wisconsin Health Innovation Program (HIP). The HIP model consolidates and enhances existing learning health system frameworks by defining specific steps needed to create sustainable change based on research conducted within the health system. As an example of the model's application, we describe its use to improve patient identification for the University of Wisconsin health system's case management program. Our case study shows the importance of culture, infrastructure, and strong leadership support in realizing a learning health systems research project and creating sustainable change within the health system. By articulating the foundational elements and steps to conduct research with learning health systems, our model supports researchers in achieving the challenge of moving learning health systems from concept to action.

Introduction

In the United States, health systems are groups of hospital and physician providers that organize around the delivery of healthcare services. While the structure of these health systems varies widely across the country, in the face of widespread challenges of rising costs and rapid changes in care delivery, health systems of all types have begun focusing on the triple aim to improve the value of healthcare, the health of populations, and the experience of the individual patient (Berwick et al., 2008). To achieve these goals requires transformative actions to rapidly generate and apply knowledge—in essence, a “rapid-learning health system” (Etheredge, 2007). Learning health systems depend on accessing and applying evidence from research while simultaneously learning from their own care delivery processes. The value of co-producing research in supporting a learning health system has been articulated (Greene et al., 2012), but there has been limited success in embedding researchers into health systems (Reid, 2016).

There are multiple useful frameworks conceptualizing a learning health system, but each framework has used a different perspective and these frameworks typically lack practical tools to guide research with learning health systems. For example, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) has identified a series of foundational elements for achieving a learning health system including a digital infrastructure, data utility, and a supportive policy environment, along with key care improvement targets (Smith et al., 2013). The Veterans Health Administration refined the IOM foundational elements based on a dynamic sustainability framework that focuses on testing interventions in real-world settings (Atkins et al., 2017). Greene et al. described learning health system activities at Group Health Cooperative using a six-phase model that encompassed scanning, design, implementation, evaluation, adjustment, and dissemination, with supporting roles for research at each phase (Greene et al., 2012). Psek et al. extended Greene's model to learning at the institutional level at Geisinger, adopting an operational perspective rather than a research perspective (Psek et al., 2015). These models provide highly valuable framing of work with learning health systems, but are limited in identifying the specific steps to incorporate research as a co-equal partner in achieving health system learning.

For researchers to contribute meaningfully to the creation of learning health systems, practical tools are required to operationalize existing conceptual frameworks. We describe a model currently in use by the University of Wisconsin (UW) Health Innovation Program (HIP). The HIP model expands beyond Greene's concept of research in a supporting role to the health system (Greene et al., 2012) to conceptualize research as a co-equal partner (Sibbald et al., 2014). The concept of a co-equal partner builds on Ovretveit's research-practice partnerships, which are defined by the intent to produce actionable findings, involvement of researchers and practitioners in defining questions and interpreting findings, and significant amounts of time or other contributions from both researchers and practitioners (Ovretveit et al., 2014). The HIP model adds the concept of sustainable change based on research conducted within the health system as a key component of research with learning health systems. This focus on health system learning and sustainable change distinguish the model from those focused primarily on research production (Martin, 2010). Because sustainable change often requires health system redesign, it highlights the importance of collaboration with human factors and systems engineering, recognizing the important role of IT, systems engineering tools, and related organizational innovations (Reid et al., 2005). The HIP model consolidates and enhances existing learning health system frameworks by defining specific practical steps needed to create sustainable change based on research conducted within the health system. As an example of the model's application, we describe the use of the model to improve patient identification for the UW health system's (UW Health) case management program.

Section snippets

Conceptual model

Launched in 2006, HIP has more than a decade of experience integrating research into clinical practice. In partnership with UW Health and UW faculty, HIP developed an approach to operationalizing the learning health system that links externally-funded research projects to health system change. Based on priorities identified by the health system, HIP identifies researchers interested in relevant topics and then facilitates communication with the health system to design and implement projects

Case study

As an example of the model's application, we describe the use of the HIP model to improve patient identification, increase program effectiveness, and achieve cost savings for the UW Health case management program.

Discussion

We have developed a model for researchers to contribute meaningfully to the creation of learning health systems, including practical tools to operationalize key concepts. Our model focuses on the specific steps needed to support a research partnership with a learning health system. Our case study shows the importance of culture, infrastructure, and strong leadership support in realizing this vision for any given project. Through development of an infrastructure and process to support learning

Declaration of competing interest

None.

Acknowledgements

Funding/Support

Research reported in this article was partially funded through two Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Awards (HSD-1603-35039; Principal Investigator: Maureen A. Smith and ME-1409-21219; Principal Investigator: Menggang Yu). The views in this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the PCORI, its Board of Governors or Methodology Committee. This project was also supported by the UW Health Innovation

References (49)

  • L.L. Berry et al.

    Care coordination for patients with complex health profiles in inpatient and outpatient settings

    Mayo Clin. Proc.

    (2013)
  • J. Hendy et al.

    The role of the organizational champion in achieving health system change

    Soc. Sci. Med.

    (2012)
  • G. King et al.

    A framework of operating models for interdisciplinary research programs in clinical service organizations

    Eval. Program Plann.

    (2008)
  • J. Applequist et al.

    "In principle we have agreement, but in practice it is a bit more difficult": obtaining organizational buy-in to Patient-Centered Medical Home transformation

    Qual. Health Res.

    (2017)
  • D. Atkins et al.

    Moving from discovery to system-wide change: the role of research in a Learning Health Care System: experience from three decades of health systems research in the Veterans Health Administration

    Annu. Rev. Public Health

    (2017)
  • P.M. Barker et al.

    A framework for scaling up health interventions: lessons from large-scale improvement initiatives in Africa

    Implement. Sci.

    (2016)
  • D.M. Berwick et al.

    The triple aim: care, health, and cost

    Health Aff (Millwood)

    (2008)
  • S. Bowen et al.

    Beyond "two cultures": guidance for establishing effective researcher/health system partnerships

    Int J Health Policy

    (2017)
  • P. Carayon et al.

    Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model

    Qual. Saf. Health Care

    (2006)
  • L.J. Damschroder et al.

    Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

    Implement. Sci.

    (2009)
  • A. Donabedian

    The quality of care. How can it be assessed?

    J. Am. Med. Assoc.

    (1988)
  • K. Donelan et al.

    Variability in care management programs in Medicare ACOs: a survey of medical directors

    J. Gen. Intern. Med.

    (2018)
  • L.M. Etheredge

    A rapid-learning health system

    Health Aff (Millwood)

    (2007)
  • C.P. Friedman et al.

    Achieving a nationwide learning health system

    Sci. Transl. Med.

    (2010)
  • S.M. Greene et al.

    Implementing the learning health system: from concept to action

    Ann. Intern. Med.

    (2012)
  • G. Harvey et al.

    PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice

    Implement. Sci.

    (2016)
  • D.H. Hickam et al.

    Agency for healthcare research and quality

    (2013)
  • R.J. Holden et al.

    SEIPS 2.0: a human factors framework for studying and improving the work of healthcare professionals and patients

    Ergonomics

    (2013)
  • J.D. Huling et al.

    Risk prediction for heterogeneous populations with application to hospital admission prediction

    Biometrics

    (2018)
  • J.D. Huling et al.

    Fused comparative intervention scoring for heterogeneity of longitudinal intervention effects

    Ann. Appl. Stat.

    (2018)
  • Institute for Healthcare Improvement

    IHI 90-Day R&D Project Final Summary Report: Network Theory

    (2012)
  • B.A. Israel et al.

    Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health

    Annu. Rev. Public Health

    (1998)
  • B.-T. Karsh et al.
    (2005)
  • A. Kitson et al.

    Facilitating an evidence-based innovation into practice: the novice facilitator's role

  • Cited by (8)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text