evaluating integrated care across the care continuum › sites › default › files › ... ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Dr.PimP.Valentijn,PhD,MSc
@pimvalentijnMemberoftheboardDeEssenburgh
SeniorresearcherMaastrichtUniversity&MaastrichtMedical UniversityCentre
WednesdayMarch29th 2017
Evaluatingintegratedcareacrossthecarecontinuum
Objectives
1. PresentanoverviewofthedevelopmentprocessoftheRainbowModelofIntegratedCare(RMIC);
2. PresentanoverviewofthedevelopmentandvalidationprocessoftheRainbowModelofIntegratedCareMeasurementTool(RMIC-MT);
3. DiscusstheinterestonacollaborativeresearchagendaandactionplantovalidatetheRMIC-MTinItaly;
4. Determinenextsteps.
Outline
1. TheRainbowModelofIntegratedCare(RMIC)
2. TheRainbowModelofIntegratedCareMeasurementTool(RMIC-MT);I. TaxonomyII. RMIC-MT1.0III. RMIC-MT2.0
3. Furtherresearch
4. Determinenextsteps
TheRainbowModelofIntegratedCare(RMIC)
Thefragmenteddeliverysystem
NewEnglandJournalofmedicine (2010), Institute ofmedicine RANDcorp (2003)&Kodner (2009),Hoangmai etal(2007)
Differentiation,specialisation,segmentation,silomindset (i.e.,policy,regulation,financing,organisation,servicedeliveryandprofessional/institutionalculture).
Currentchallenges
1. Integratedcareisconsideredanessentialstrategytoimprovepatientexperienceofcare,healthofthepopulation andreducethecostpercapita(TripleAim)(Berwick 2009;Alderwick 2015)
2. However,thereisalackofpublisheddatatobackupthisassertion(Valentijn 2015;Nolte; 2014)
3. Informationonintegratedcaremechanismsareneededtodeterminetheaddedvalueofanintegratedcarestrategywithindifferentsettings(Porter2006;Evans2013&2014;Valentijn2015)
Integratedcare=Conceptualconfusion
Kodner (2009)
Differentperspectivesandvalues
Easyaccessandnavigation;seamlesscare
Coordinationoftasks,servicesandcareacross
professionalandinstitutionalboundaries
Improvequality,marketshareand
efficiency
Improveaccess,qualityandcontinuity
ofservices
Diseasespecificorperson-focused?!Reductionism(Diseasespecific)
Inter-determinism(Person-focused)
Implications
ThelegacyofBarbaraStarfield
Person-focusedcare
Populationbasedcare
Comprehensive&coordinatedcare
Firstcontactofcare
TheRainbowModelofIntegratedCare(RMIC)
Clinical integration Coordination of care for a complex need at stake in a single process across time, place and discipline.
Professional integrationInter-professional partnerships based on a shared accountability to deliver care to a defined population.
Organisational integration Inter-organisational partnerships based on collaborative accountability and shared governance mechanisms, to deliver care to a defined population.
System integrationCoherent set of (informal and formal) political arrangements to facilitate professionals and organisations to deliver a comprehensive continuum of care .
Valentijn (2013, 2015 and 2016)
Thecontinuumofeachdimension
Valentijn (2013)
Thehypotheses
QualityofcareAveragecosts
Segregation
Linkage
Coordination
Integration
Openingtheblackbox
Segregation Linkage Coordination Integration
Service
Professional
Organizational
Functional
Normative
System
?
TheRainbowModelofIntegratedCareMeasurementTool(RMIC-MT)
Background
1. Thereisnouniversallyacceptedframeworkandmeasurementtoolthatmeasuresthelevelofintegratedcareacrossthecarecontinuum(Valentijn2016)
2. Thelackofavalidatedmeasurementtoolthatassessesallaspectsofintegratedcare,whichhighlyimpedesthesystematicunderstandingandposessignificantchallengesforpolicymakers,commissioners,managers,professionalsandresearcherstosupporttheeffectivedeploymentandevaluation ofintegratedcareinpractice(Valentijn 2015and2016)
3. Theoverallobjectiveistodevelopandvalidate ameasurementtoolthatisshort,simpleandgenericincontentinordertomaximise itspotentialforroutineuseacrossthecontinuumofcare.
OverallstudydesignAmixed-methodapproachconsistingof:1)aliteraturereview;2)thematicanalysis;and3)threeDelphistudieswereusedtodeveloptheRMIC-MT.
• Narrativeliteraturereview&expertmeetings
METHODS
RESU
LT
Conceptualisation1
• RMIC• Valentijn etal.(2013)
Operationalization2
• Literaturereview&thematicanalysis
• Preliminarytaxonomy• Valentijn etal.(2015a)
Consensus3
• ThreeDelphistudies
• Finaltaxonomy• Valentijn etal.(2015a
and1015b)
Prototyping4
• Threepilotstudiesassessingface andcontentvalidity
• PreliminaryRMIC_MT• Nurjono etal.(2016)
andAngus(2016)
Validation5
• Threepilotstudiesassessingthepsychometricproperties
• RMIC-MT• Nurjono etal.and
Angus(2016)
Step1-3:Taxonomy
Step4-5:RMIC-MT
Step1– 3:Thetaxonomyofintegratedprimarycare
Aimandresearchobjectives
Contributetothe(ongoing)debateofdefiningandspecifyingintegratedcare:
1. RefinetheRMICbydevelopingataxonomythatspecifiestheunderlyingkeyfeatures
2. Developaconsensusbasedtaxonomybasedonnationalandinternationalexpertopinions
Studydesign
Valentijn et al. (2015)
ThreeDelphistudies• Expertswithascientificand/orpracticalbackground fieldof ICPC• RANDUCLAappropriatenessmethod Fitchetal. (2001)
- Self-administratedquestionnaire(round1)- Physicalmeetingofexperts(round2)
• Appropriateness toachieveICPC:1(completely irrelevant)to9(extremelyrelevant)
Median(1-3) Median(4-6) Median(7-9)
Round1 Agreement(≤70%) Equivocal;discussionround 2 Equivocal;discussionround 2 Equivocal:discussionround 2
Agreement(≥70%) Inappropriate; excluded afterround1 Equivocal;discussionround 2 Appropriate; included afterround 1
Round2 Agreement(≤70%) Equivocal Equivocal Equivocal
Agreement(≥70%) Inappropriate Equivocal Appropriate
Valentijn et al. (2015)
ParticipantsThreeDelphistudiesDelphistudy1(national) Delphistudy2(international) Delphistudy3(international)Round1 Round2 Round1 Round2 Round1 Round2
Noofparticipantsparticipating 14 10 16 15 8 8Dominantbackground,n(%)
Practical 7(50) 6(60) 7(44) 6(40) 4(50) 4(50)
Scientific 7(50) 4(40) 9(56) 9(60) 4(50) 4(50)
Yearsofexperience,mean(SD),range 11.6(8.8),4-40 10.9(10.3),4-40 9.5(6.7),3-25 9.5(6.9),3-25 13.4(8.6),4-25 13.4(8.6),4-25
<5 1(7) 1(10) 2(12) 2(13) 2(25) 2(25)
5-10 7(50) 6(60) 10(63) 9(60) 2(25) 2(25)
>10 6(43) 3(30) 4(25) 4(27) 4(50) 4(50)
Experiencegainedincountry,n
Australia 0 0 1 0 2 2
Austria 0 0 1 1 0 0
Belgium 0 0 2 2 1 1
ElSalvador 0 0 1 1 0 0
Germany 0 0 0 0 1 1
NewZealand 0 0 0 0 2 2
Russia 0 0 1 1 0 0
Singapore 0 0 5 5 0 0
Spain 0 0 1 1 0 0
Sweden 0 0 1 1 0 0
TheNetherlands 14 10 1 1 2 2
UK 0 0 1 1 0 0
USA 0 0 1 1 0 0
Valentijn et al. (2015)
Synthesisofresults
Valentijn et al. (2015)
Mainfindings• Clinical,professionalandorganisational integrationdomainsweremostrecognised
• Lessemphasiseswasbeingplacedonthesystemintegrationdomain
• Normativedomainas‘soft’enablerwashighly recognisedbyallexperts
Valentijn et al. (2015)
Taxonomyof21keyfeaturesMain categories and domains Description
Scope of integrated care Person-focused care
Centrality of client needs The principle of integrated service delivery is to address the needs of individual clients in terms of medical, psychological and social aspects of health
Population based care Centrality of population needs b The principle of integrated service delivery is to address the dominant needs of well-defined populations
Type of integration processes
Clinical integration Case management Coordination of care for clients with a high risk profile (e.g. identifying risks, developing policies and guidance)
Continuity Integrated service delivery aims to provide fluid the processes of care delivery for an individual client
Interaction between professional and client Attitude and behavioural characteristics between professional and client regarding all health needs of the client
Individual multidisciplinary care plan Implementation and application of a multidisciplinary care plan at the individual client level
Professional integration Inter-professional education Inter-professional education for professionals focused on interdisciplinary service delivery and collaboration
Agreements on interdisciplinary collaboration Agreements on the establishment of interdisciplinary service delivery and collaboration between the professionals
Value creation for the professional The value added by the integrated service delivery approach for the individual professional
Organisational integration
Inter-organisational governance b The governance of the integrated service model is focused on openness, integrity and accountability between the involved organisations and professionals (e.g. joint accountability, appeal on pursued policies and responsibilities)
Inter-organisational strategy Collective elaborated strategy between the organisations involved in the integrated service model
Trust The extent to which those involved in the integrated service model trust each other
System integration
Alignment of regulatory frameworks a Alignment of regulatory frameworks for teamwork, coordination and continuity of care
Environmental climate a Political, economic and social climate in the environment of the integrated service model (e.g. market characteristics, regulatory framework, and competition)
Enablers for integration
Functional integration
Learning organisations Collective learning power between the organisations involved in the integrated service model (e.g. joint research and development programs)
Information management Aligned information management systems within the integrated service model (e.g. monitoring and benchmarking systems)
Regular feedback of performance indicators Regular feedback of performance indicators for quality improvement and self-reflection
Normative integration Shared vision b Collectively shared long-term vision among the people who are involved in the integrated service model
Reliable behaviour The extent to which the agreements and promises within the integrated service model are fulfilled
Visionary leadership Leadership based on a vision that inspires and mobilizes people within the integrated service model
Linking cultures Linking cultures (e.g. values and norms) with different ideological values within the integrated service model
a Features were added at final taxonomy during the review and synthesis process b Features were merged due to identical or nearly identical content
Valentijn et al. (2015)
Step4– 5:Developmentandvalidationofameasurementtool(RMIC-MT)
Aimandresearchobjectives
Theoverallaimistodevelopandvalidate‘TheRainbowModelofIntegratedCareMeasurementTool(RMIC-MT)’toassessthemicrolevel,meso level,macrolevelandenablingaspectsofintegratedcare.Tothisend,theresearchobjectivesinclude:
1. TodeveloptheRMIC-MTusingthetaxonomy
2. ToexplorethefaceandcontentvalidityoftheRMIC-MT
3. ToexplorethepsychometricpropertiesoftheRMIC-MTindifferentpilotstudies
4. TomodifyandimprovetheRMIC-MTbasedtheresultsofthedifferentpilotstudies
TheRMIC-MT1.0
Studydesign
Literaturereviewofintegratedcareinstruments
Coredomainsanditemselection
Person-focusedcare
Population-basedcare
Clinicalintegration
Professionalintegration
Organisationalintegration
Systemintegration
Functionalintegration
Normativeintegration Pilotversion1.0
Pre-testing• Assessmentoffaceandcontentvalidity
Designcriteria• Evidenceforpsychometricproperties;• Genericcontent;and• Easytouse(e.g.minimaluserburden).
Field-testing• Testingforclarityandfeasibilityamongtargetgroups
Validationstudies• Psychometrictesting
PreliminarypilotversionRMIC-MT1.0(44items)
Domain Variable Example Items Responseoptions
Scope Person-focusedcare Interventionsareusedtopromoteclients'self-careability 5 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)Population basedcare Populationneedsareincludedintheobjectivesofthepartnership 4 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)
Type
Clinicalintegration Professionalshaveagreementsonthereferraland transfers(follow-up)ofclients 5 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)Professional integration Professionalsusemultidisciplinaryguidelinesandprotocols 6 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)Organisationalintegration Interestoftheorganizationsinvolvedareconsidered 6 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)
SystemintegrationThepartnershipishamperedbytherulesand/orpoliciessetbytheministries(e.g.Ministryofhealth) 5 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)
Enablers Functional integrationIncentivesareusedtoimproveteamwork, coordinationandcontinuityofcareamongprofessionals 7 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)
Normativeintegration Activitiesareundertakentobetterunderstandotherorganizationalcultures 6 Never(1)– Allthetime(4)
• Operationalizationofthe21keyfeatures• Focusoninter-sectorial,inter-organisational,andinter-professionalintegrationand/orcollaboration• Developedforhealthcareprofessionals,policymakers,commissioners,managers,professionals
Preliminaryfieldtestinginthreepilots
Objectives:1. Explore theusabilityofthepilot version
Conclusion• Further workneededtoimprovethe
measurementtool
TheNetherlands Australia1 2 Singapore3
Method:• Multiplecasestudydesign(23birth centre's)
Datacollection:• Self-administrated questionnaire
Results• 77%responserate(56outof73)• Easytouse
Objectives:1. Assesstheusabilityofthepilotversion2. Explore faceandcontent validity
Conclusion• Acceptablefaceandcontent validity• Needforadditional itemdevelopmentandediting
Method:• Purposivesampleof38integratedprimary
careinitiatives
Datacollection:• Self-administrated questionnaire
Results• 114respondents• Relevantandeasytouse(65%)
Objectives:1. Explore faceandcontent validity2. Explore psychometric properties
Conclusion• Acceptablepsychometric properties• Further workneededtocoverallconceptual
dimensions oftheRMIC
Method:• Purposivesampleof2RegionalHealth
Systems(theNational Healthcare GroupandtheNational UniversityHealthSystem)
Datacollection:• Self-administrated questionnaire
Results• 40%responserate(103out260)• Goodcontent andfacevalidity• Fivedistinguishable factors(43items)• Proper scalereliability (α 0.81-0.94)
Mainfindingspreliminarypilots
• Relevantandeasytouseinstrument;
• Goodcontentandfacevaliditywithindifferentsettings;
• Needforcontextualeditinganditemdevelopment;
• Goodpsychometricpropertiesforscales:clinicalintegration,normativeintegration,andperson-focusedcare;
• Furtherworkneededtoimprovepsychometricpropertiesforscales:professionalintegration,organisationalintegration,systemintegration,functionalintegration,andpopulation-basedcare;
• Patientversionishighlyneeded/recommended;
• Furthervalidationstudiesusinglargersamplesareneeded.
TheRMIC-MT2.0
TowardsandimprovedversionoftheRMIC-MT
Literaturereviewofintegratedcareinstruments*
Coredomainsanditemselection
Person-focusedcare
Population-basedcare
Clinicalintegration
Professionalintegration
Organisationalintegration
Systemintegration
Functionalintegration
Normativeintegration Pilotversion2.0
Pre-testing• Assessmentoffaceandcontentvalidity
Designcriteria• Evidenceforpsychometricproperties**;• Genericcontent;and• Easytouse(e.g.minimaluserburden).
Field-testing• Testingforclarityandfeasibilityamongtargetgroups
Validationstudies• Psychometrictesting*BasedonBautistaetal.(2016)andUijen etal(2012)andhandsearchofreferencelists.
**COSMIN(COnsensus-basedStandardsfortheselectionofhealthMeasurementInstruments)qualityscore
TheRMIC-MT2.0
• Reviewed>300integratedcareinstrumentsforhealthcarestaff(e.g.managementandhealthcareprofessionals)andpatients
• Itemdatabasestaff:170potentiallyrelevantitems
• Itemdatabasepatients:164potentially relevantitems
• Selectioncriteria:• GenericcontentperRMICdomain• Evidenceforpsychometricproperties (e.g.COSMINqualityscore)• Easetouse
TheRMIC-MT2.0StaffversionDomain Variable Example Items Responseoptions
Person-focusedcare Thinkingaboutthepatientasapersonisimportantingettingtreatmentright. 5 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)Populationbasedcare Weworkwithnonclinicianstodelivermoreeffectivehealthcare 5 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)Clinicalintegration Writtenplansandschedulesareusedforpatientreferrals,transfersandfollow-up 7 Never(1)–Always(5)Professionalintegration Multidisciplinaryguidelinesand/orprotocolsarebeingused 7 Never(1)–Always(5)Organisationalintegration Ourcliniccoordinateswithotherorganizationsintheregiontoeliminateunnecessaryduplicationofadministrativeservices4 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)Systemintegration Localhealthcarepoliciesincentivisepartnershipswithotherorganisations 5 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)Functionalintegration Outcomesaresystematicallymonitored/followed-up 11 Never(1)–Allthetime(4)Normativeintegration Peopletreateachotherwithrespect 8 Never(1)–Allthetime(4)
Scope
Type
Enablers
1.RMIC-MT2.0staffversion(52items)
PatientversionDomain Variable Example Items Responseoptions
Person-focusedcare Careproviderslistentothethingsthatmattermosttome 6 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)Clinicalintegration Mydoctoralwaysrememberswhathe/shedidduringmylastvisit(s) 8 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)Professionalintegration Careprovidersworktogetherverywell 4 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)Organisationintegration Icangetappointmentswithmyspecialistquicklyenough 6 Stronglydisagree(1)-Stronglyagree(5)
Patientpercievedcarecoordination
2.RevisedRMIC-MTpatientversion(24items)
ValidationstepsoftheRMIC-MT2.0
Phase Description Method CriteriaPhase1:Improvementofmeasurementtool
Generationofitemsbasedonsystematicreviewofmeasurementtoolsandgreyliterature
Reviewofexistingquestionnaires 1.GenericcontentperRMICdomain;2.COSMIN quality score(>1.50);and3.Easetouse(1to3score).
Phase2:Pre-testing Assessmentoffaceandcontentvalidity Multidisciplinaryexpertpanelofapp.10professionalsandapp.5-10patients(perpilot).
1.Wordingisclear;
2.Questionisredundant;and3.Relevance(4-pointLikertscale).
Phase3:Field-testing Testingforclarityandfeasibilityamongpatients.
Pilot-testingtheRMIC-MT 2.0 amongasampleofapp.50to60patients.
1.Length;2.Clarity;and3.Upsetting.
Phase4:Validation study Testingpsychometricproperties Multinationalsurveystudyamong321dialysisclinicsin20countries
1. Reliability;2. Constructvalidity;3. Concurrentvalidity
Further research
Amultinationalsurveystudy1. ToidentifytheprevalenceofperceivedunmetcarecoordinationneedsamongChronicKidneyDisease(CKD)
patients;and
2. Toassesstherelationshipbetweenadialysisclinicscarecoordinationcharacteristicsandthepatient
perceivedcarecoordinationneeds.
Practicecharacteristics Patientperceivedoutcomes
Enablingcharacteristics
• Person-focusedcare• Populationbasedcare• Clinicalintegration• Professionalintegration• Organisationalintegration
• Normativeintegration• Functionalintegration• Systemintegration
• Person-focusedcare• Clinicalintegration• Professionalintegration• Organisationalintegration
Theglobalunmetcarecoordinationneeds?!
Sampleandsetting:
• 321clinicsin20countries
• Staff(n=3000)
• Patients(n=10.000)
Discussionandnextsteps
Discussionandnextsteps
1. AreyouinterestedtovalidatetheRMIC-MT2.0intheItaliancontext?
2. Whatkindoffundingisneededtoset-upa(validation)studyinItaly?
3. Whatcouldbeourcollaborativenextsteps?
DisclaimerThispresentationhasbeenpreparedbyIntegratedCareEvaluation(ICE).Theinformationcontainedinthispresentationisderived frompublicandprivatesourcesthatwebelievetobe
reliableandaccuratebutofwhich,withoutfurtherinvestigation,theiraccuracy,completenessorcorrectnesscannotbewarranted.Thisinformationissuppliedonthecondition thatICE,
isnot liableforanyerroror inaccuracycontainedherein,whethernegligentlycausedorotherwise,orforlossordamagesufferedbyanypersonduetosucherror,omissionorinaccuracy
asaresultofsuchsupply. ICEhasno responsibilitywhatsoevertoanythirdpartywithrespecttothecontentsofthispresentation.
Thematerialofthispresentation,includingimagesandtext,areforpersonal,educational,non-commercialuseonly.Pleasedon't copyor reproducewhatwe'vecometoconsiderour
ownlittlebitofintellectualproperty.Youmay,ofcourse,usethispresentationaslongasaproper referenceisgiven:‘Valentijn P.P.Rainbowofchaos:Evaluating integratedcareacross
thecarecontinuum, Pisa,Italy,March 29,2017’.Acommentonsocialmedia(LinkedIn orTwitter)isalsoverymuchappreciated,whenyouusethispresentation.
Formoreinformationaboutthispresentation,pleasecontact:
Dr.PimP.Valentijn,PhD,MSc
Zuiderzeestraatweg199
3849AEHierden
TheNetherlands
(t)+31(0)341451841
(m)+31(0)623720215
(i)www.integratedcareevaluation.org
References1. BerwickDM,NolanTW,WhittingtonJ.Thetripleaim:care,health,andcost.HealthAff.2008;27(3):759–769.doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.3.759.2. Alderwick H,HamC,BuckD.Populationhealthsystems:Goingbeyondintegratedcare.2015.3. Valentijn P.P.Rainbowofchaos:Astudyintothetheoryandpracticeofintegratedprimarycare.Tilburg:UniversityPress;2015.DoctoralthesisTilburgUniversity.ISBN:978-94-
91602-40-54. Valentijn P.P.RainbowofChaos:AstudyintotheTheoryandPracticeofIntegratedPrimaryCare:Pim P.Valentijn,[S.l.:s.n.],2015(PrintServiceEde),pp.195,DoctoralThesis
TilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands,ISBN:978-94-91602-40-5.InternationalJournalIntegratedCare.2016;16(2):3.5. NolteE,McKeeM.Integrationandchroniccare:areview.In:NolteE,McKeeM,editors.Caringforpeoplewithchronicconditions:Ahealthsystemperspective.Maidenhead:Open
UniversityPress;2008.p.64–916. PorterME,Teisberg EO.Rede ning healthcare:creatingvalue-basedcompetitiononresults.Boston:HarvardBusinessPress;20067. EvansJM,BakerGR,BertaW,BarnsleyJ.Theevolutionofintegratedhealthcarestrategies.Adv HealthCareManag.2013;15:125–61.8. EvansJ,BakerG,BertaW,BarnsleyJ.Acognitiveperspectiveonhealthsystemsintegration:resultsofaCanadianDelphistudy.BMCHealthServ Res.2014;14(1):222.9. ValentijnP.P.,Biermann C.,BruijnzeelsM.A.Value-basedintegrated(renal)care:settingadevelopmentagendaforresearchandimplementationstrategies.BMCHealthServ Res.
2016;16:330- 016-1586-0.10. ValentijnP.P.,Schepman S.M.,Opheij W.,BruijnzeelsM.A.Understandingintegratedcare:Acomprehensiveconceptualframeworkbasedontheintegrativefunctionsofprimary
care.InternationalJournalofIntegratedCare.2013;13:e010.11. ValentijnP.P.,Boesveld I.C.,vanderKlauw,D.M.,Ruwaard D.,Struijs J.N.,Molema J.J.,BruijnzeelsM.A.,VrijhoefH.J.Towardsataxonomyforintegratedcare:Amixed-methods
study.InternationalJournalofIntegratedCare.2015;15:e003.12. ValentijnP.P.,VrijhoefH.J.,Ruwaard D.,Boesveld I.,Arends R.Y.,BruijnzeelsM.A.Towardsaninternationaltaxonomyofintegratedprimarycare:ADelphiconsensusapproach.BMC
FamilyPractice.2015;16(1):64-015-0278-x13. NurjonoM,ValentijnP.P.,BautistaM.A.C.,LimY.W.,VrijhoefH.J.AprospectivevalidationstudyofarainbowmodelofintegratedcaremeasurementtoolinSingapore.International
JournalofIntegratedCare.2016;16(1).14. Boesveld I,ValentijnP.P.,Hitzert M.,Klapwijk-HermusM.,Franx A.,deVries T.A.,Wiegers T.A.,Bruijnzeels M.A.Exploringmeasuringintegratedcareinamaternitycaresystem:15. experiencesfromtheMaternityCareNetworkStudyandtheDutchBirthCentreStudy(submitted)16. AngusL,ValentijnP.P.CharacterizinghealthcareintegrationinAustralia:Earlyobservations.PrimaryHealthCareResearchConference,CanberraAustralia,June8-9201617. NurjonoM,ValentijnP.P.,BautistaM.A.C.,LimY.W.,VrijhoefH.J.M.,PsychometricValidationoftheRainbowModelofIntegratedCare(RMIC)andReadinesstoCollaborate
InstrumentswithinSingapore’sRegionalHealthSystems.(inpreparation)18. AngusL..CharacterizingHealthCareIntegrationinAustralia:Finalreport2015-16Australian-AmericanHealthPolicyFellowship.July29,2016.