Is the Kaiser Permanente model superior in terms of clinical integration?: a comparative study of Kaiser Permanente, Northern California and the Danish healthcare system

• Main Authors: Krasnik Allan (Author), Bellows Jim (Author), Reed Mary (Author), Graetz Ilana (Author), Andersen John S (Author), Frølich Anne (Author), Silver Jeremy D (Author), Schiøtz Michaela L (Author), Strandberg-Larsen Martin (Author), Rundall Thomas (Author), Hsu John (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: BMC, 2010-04-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-91; 1472-6963
• Keywords: Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: BMC Health Services Research, Vol 10, Iss 1, p 91 (2010)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Integration of medical care across clinicians and settings could enhance the quality of care for patients. To date, there is limited data on the levels of integration in practice. Our objective was to compare primary care clinicians' perceptions of clinical integration and three sub-aspects in two healthcare systems: Kaiser Permanente, Northern California (KPNC) and the Danish healthcare system (DHS). Further, we examined the associations between specific organizational factors and clinical integration within each system.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Comparable questionnaires were sent to a random sample of primary care clinicians in KPNC (n = 1103) and general practitioners in DHS (n = 700). Data were analysed using multiple logistic regression models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>More clinicians in KPNC perceived to be part of a clinical integrated environment than did general practitioners in the DHS (OR = 3.06, 95% CI: 2.28, 4.12). Further, more KPNC clinicians reported timeliness of information transfer (OR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.62, 3.13), agreement on roles and responsibilities (OR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.30, 2.47) and established coordination mechanisms in place to ensure effective handoffs (OR = 6.80, 95% CI: 4.60, 10.06). None of the considered organizational factors in the sub-country analysis explained a substantial proportion of the variation in clinical integration.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>More primary care clinicians in KPNC reported clinical integration than did general practitioners in the DHS. Focused measures of clinical integration are needed to develop the field of clinical integration and to create the scientific foundation to guide managers searching for evidence based approaches.</p>