The effectiveness of clinical networks in improving quality of care and patient outcomes: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies

Abstract

BackgroundReorganisation of healthcare services into networks of clinical experts is increasing as a strategy to promote the uptake of evidence based practice and to improve patient care. This is reflected in significant financial investment in clinical networks. However, there is still some question as to whether clinical networks are effective vehicles for quality improvement. The aim of this systematic review was to ascertain the effectiveness of clinical networks and identify how successful networks improve quality of care and patient outcomes.MethodsA systematic search was undertaken in accordance with the PRISMA approach in Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PubMed for relevant papers between 1 January 1996 and 30 September 2014. Established protocols were used separately to examine and assess the evidence from quantitative and qualitative primary studies and then integrate findings.ResultsA total of 22 eligible studies (9 quantitative; 13 qualitative) were included. Of the quantitative studies, seven focused on improving quality of care and two focused on improving patient outcomes. Quantitative studies were limited by a lack of rigorous experimental design. The evidence indicates that clinical networks can be effective vehicles for quality improvement in service delivery and patient outcomes across a range of clinical disciplines. However, there was variability in the networks’ ability to make meaningful network- or system-wide change in more complex processes such as those requiring intensive professional education or more comprehensive redesign of care pathways. Findings from qualitative studies indicated networks that had a positive impact on quality of care and patients outcomes were those that had adequate resources, credible leadership and efficient management coupled with effective communication strategies and collaborative trusting relationships.ConclusionsThere is evidence that clinical networks can improve the delivery of healthcare though there are few high quality quantitative studies of their effectiveness. Our findings can provide policymakers with some insight into how to successfully plan and implement clinical networks by ensuring strong clinical leadership, an inclusive organisational culture, adequate resourcing and localised decision-making authority.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1615-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The impact of new forms of large-scale general practice provider collaborations on England’s NHS: a systematic review

“…23 A wide range of factors other than size alone influence performance, including the availability of resources, the quality of clinical leadership, and pre-existing relationships in the local health economy. [34][35][36][37][38][39][40] The time and resources involved in health service reorganisations such as scaling up organisations have often been underestimated, and anticipated benefits have not always been delivered. 20,[41][42][43] Although patients may value increased routes of access through scaling up, new access routes may not be well received by all patients.…”

The challenge of inclusive coproduction: The importance of situated rituals and emotional inclusivity in the coproduction of health research projects

“…To counter these challenges, previous studies have identified a number of factors that influence the effectiveness of collaborative work, including leadership, geographical proximity, stakeholders' knowledge and experience, resources, navigating between differing epistemological bases, managing relational complexity, opportunities for feedback, and the pay‐off for involvement (Baker & Irving, ; Brown et al, ; Currie, Enany, & Lockett, ; Fitzgerald & Harvey, ; Fung, ; Rycroft‐Malone et al, ).…”

“…Of particular relevance to our work is the idea that coproduced research should be inclusive of relevant stakeholders. For example, Brown et al (, p. 9) highlight that a “culture of inclusivity” is crucial, whereas Rycroft‐Malone et al (, p. 24) argue that a lack of belonging has a “negative impact on engagement.” In this regard, the idea of inclusive coproduction has close similarities with research and theory on situated and social learning, especially the “communities of practice” concept, which describes how people engage in collective learning through shared domains of activity (Lave and Wenger, ). Significant here is the idea of active participation in shared practices, many of which can have a taken‐for‐granted quality as people build up shared repertoires and routines as they seek out and share information in the processes of problem‐solving.…”

Evaluation of DementiaNet, a network-based primary care innovation for community-dwelling patients with dementia: protocol for a longitudinal mixed methods multiple case study

“…Hence, these networks include collaborations between individuals and organisations across institutional and professional boundaries. These clinical networks thereby ensure quality of and access to care for patients, including those who require coordination of care across a range of settings 15. This is pursued through formation of networks of primary care professionals who jointly and locally provide care to a number of patients with dementia, desirably including at least one professional of the medical (eg, general practitioner), care (eg, community nurses or case managers) and welfare (eg, social workers) discipline.…”