Coping with interdependencies related to patient choice: Boundary-spanning at four accountable care organizations

Brian Hilligoss, Ann Scheck Mcalearney, Paula H. Song

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are responsible for outcomes that are only partially under their control because patients may choose to self-refer outside the ACO, overuse resource-intensive services, or underuse evidence-based care. ACOs must devise boundary-spanning practices to manage these interdependencies related to patient choice. Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify, conceptualize, and categorize ACO efforts to cope with interdependencies related to patient choice. Approach: We conducted qualitative organizational case studies of four ACOs. We interviewed 89 executives, mid-level managers, and physicians and analyzed the data through multiple rounds of inductive coding. Results: We identified 15 boundary-spanning practices, in which two or more ACOs engaged in efforts to understand, cope with, or alter interdependencies related to patient choice. Analysis of these practices revealed five categories of factors that appeared to shape patient choices in ways that may impact ACO performance: the availability of services, interactions with patients, system complexities, care provided to ACO patients by non-ACO providers, and uncertainties related to the environment. Our findings provide a process theory of ACO boundary-spanning: Each individual boundary-spanning practice contributes to a broader strategic goal, through which it may impact a particular aspect of interdependence and thereby reduce underuse, overuse, or leakage (i.e., provision of services outside the ACO). Practice Implications: In identifying ACO boundary-spanning practices and proposing how they may impact interdependence, our theory highlights conceptual relationships that researchers can study and test. Similarly, in identifying key aspects of interdependencies related to patient choice and a broad assortment of ACO boundary-spanning practices, our findings provide managers with a tool for evaluating and developing their own boundary-spanning efforts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)115-126
Number of pages12
JournalHealth Care Management Review
Volume44
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Accountable Care Organizations
Interdependencies
Patient choice
Boundary spanning
Organizational Case Studies

Keywords

  • accountable care organizations
  • boundary-spanning
  • patient choice
  • qualitative case studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Leadership and Management
  • Health Policy
  • Strategy and Management

Cite this

Coping with interdependencies related to patient choice : Boundary-spanning at four accountable care organizations. / Hilligoss, Brian; Mcalearney, Ann Scheck; Song, Paula H.

In: Health Care Management Review, Vol. 44, No. 2, 01.04.2019, p. 115-126.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{83ec0972d97b43aebb724cf81f0ea7be,
title = "Coping with interdependencies related to patient choice: Boundary-spanning at four accountable care organizations",
abstract = "Background: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are responsible for outcomes that are only partially under their control because patients may choose to self-refer outside the ACO, overuse resource-intensive services, or underuse evidence-based care. ACOs must devise boundary-spanning practices to manage these interdependencies related to patient choice. Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify, conceptualize, and categorize ACO efforts to cope with interdependencies related to patient choice. Approach: We conducted qualitative organizational case studies of four ACOs. We interviewed 89 executives, mid-level managers, and physicians and analyzed the data through multiple rounds of inductive coding. Results: We identified 15 boundary-spanning practices, in which two or more ACOs engaged in efforts to understand, cope with, or alter interdependencies related to patient choice. Analysis of these practices revealed five categories of factors that appeared to shape patient choices in ways that may impact ACO performance: the availability of services, interactions with patients, system complexities, care provided to ACO patients by non-ACO providers, and uncertainties related to the environment. Our findings provide a process theory of ACO boundary-spanning: Each individual boundary-spanning practice contributes to a broader strategic goal, through which it may impact a particular aspect of interdependence and thereby reduce underuse, overuse, or leakage (i.e., provision of services outside the ACO). Practice Implications: In identifying ACO boundary-spanning practices and proposing how they may impact interdependence, our theory highlights conceptual relationships that researchers can study and test. Similarly, in identifying key aspects of interdependencies related to patient choice and a broad assortment of ACO boundary-spanning practices, our findings provide managers with a tool for evaluating and developing their own boundary-spanning efforts.",
keywords = "accountable care organizations, boundary-spanning, patient choice, qualitative case studies",
author = "Brian Hilligoss and Mcalearney, {Ann Scheck} and Song, {Paula H.}",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/HMR.0000000000000147",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "115--126",
journal = "Health Care Management Review",
issn = "0361-6274",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Coping with interdependencies related to patient choice

T2 - Boundary-spanning at four accountable care organizations

AU - Hilligoss, Brian

AU - Mcalearney, Ann Scheck

AU - Song, Paula H.

PY - 2019/4/1

Y1 - 2019/4/1

N2 - Background: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are responsible for outcomes that are only partially under their control because patients may choose to self-refer outside the ACO, overuse resource-intensive services, or underuse evidence-based care. ACOs must devise boundary-spanning practices to manage these interdependencies related to patient choice. Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify, conceptualize, and categorize ACO efforts to cope with interdependencies related to patient choice. Approach: We conducted qualitative organizational case studies of four ACOs. We interviewed 89 executives, mid-level managers, and physicians and analyzed the data through multiple rounds of inductive coding. Results: We identified 15 boundary-spanning practices, in which two or more ACOs engaged in efforts to understand, cope with, or alter interdependencies related to patient choice. Analysis of these practices revealed five categories of factors that appeared to shape patient choices in ways that may impact ACO performance: the availability of services, interactions with patients, system complexities, care provided to ACO patients by non-ACO providers, and uncertainties related to the environment. Our findings provide a process theory of ACO boundary-spanning: Each individual boundary-spanning practice contributes to a broader strategic goal, through which it may impact a particular aspect of interdependence and thereby reduce underuse, overuse, or leakage (i.e., provision of services outside the ACO). Practice Implications: In identifying ACO boundary-spanning practices and proposing how they may impact interdependence, our theory highlights conceptual relationships that researchers can study and test. Similarly, in identifying key aspects of interdependencies related to patient choice and a broad assortment of ACO boundary-spanning practices, our findings provide managers with a tool for evaluating and developing their own boundary-spanning efforts.

AB - Background: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are responsible for outcomes that are only partially under their control because patients may choose to self-refer outside the ACO, overuse resource-intensive services, or underuse evidence-based care. ACOs must devise boundary-spanning practices to manage these interdependencies related to patient choice. Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify, conceptualize, and categorize ACO efforts to cope with interdependencies related to patient choice. Approach: We conducted qualitative organizational case studies of four ACOs. We interviewed 89 executives, mid-level managers, and physicians and analyzed the data through multiple rounds of inductive coding. Results: We identified 15 boundary-spanning practices, in which two or more ACOs engaged in efforts to understand, cope with, or alter interdependencies related to patient choice. Analysis of these practices revealed five categories of factors that appeared to shape patient choices in ways that may impact ACO performance: the availability of services, interactions with patients, system complexities, care provided to ACO patients by non-ACO providers, and uncertainties related to the environment. Our findings provide a process theory of ACO boundary-spanning: Each individual boundary-spanning practice contributes to a broader strategic goal, through which it may impact a particular aspect of interdependence and thereby reduce underuse, overuse, or leakage (i.e., provision of services outside the ACO). Practice Implications: In identifying ACO boundary-spanning practices and proposing how they may impact interdependence, our theory highlights conceptual relationships that researchers can study and test. Similarly, in identifying key aspects of interdependencies related to patient choice and a broad assortment of ACO boundary-spanning practices, our findings provide managers with a tool for evaluating and developing their own boundary-spanning efforts.

KW - accountable care organizations

KW - boundary-spanning

KW - patient choice

KW - qualitative case studies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85010908125&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85010908125&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000147

DO - 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000147

M3 - Article

C2 - 28125456

AN - SCOPUS:85010908125

VL - 44

SP - 115

EP - 126

JO - Health Care Management Review

JF - Health Care Management Review

SN - 0361-6274

IS - 2

ER -