Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Dec 23;12(12):e059794.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059794.

How the Esther Network model for coproduction of person-centred health and social care was adopted and adapted in Singapore: a realist evaluation

Affiliations

How the Esther Network model for coproduction of person-centred health and social care was adopted and adapted in Singapore: a realist evaluation

Esther Li Ping Lim et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: The Esther Network (EN) model, a person-centred care innovation in Sweden, was adopted in Singapore to promote person-centredness and improve integration between health and social care practitioners. This realist evaluation aimed to explain its adoption and adaptation in Singapore.

Design: An organisational case study using a realist evaluation approach drawing on Greenhalgh et al (2004)'s Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organisations to guide data collection and analysis. Data collection included interviews with seven individuals and three focus groups (including stakeholders from the macrosystem, mesosystem and microsystem levels) about their experiences of EN in Singapore, and field notes from participant observations of EN activities.

Setting: SingHealth, a healthcare cluster serving a population of 1.37 million residents in Eastern Singapore.

Participants: Policy makers (n=4), EN programme implementers (n=3), practitioners (n=6) and service users (n=7) participated in individual interviews or focus group discussions.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: Outcome data from healthcare institutions (n=13) and community agencies (n=59) were included in document analysis.

Results: Singapore's ageing population and need to transition from a hospital-based model to a more sustainable community-based model provided an opportunity for change. The personalised nature and logic of the EN model resonated with leaders and led to collective adoption. Embedded cultural influences such as the need for order and hierarchical structures were both barriers to, and facilitators of, change. Coproduction between service users and practitioners in making care improvements deepened the relationships and commitments that held the network together.

Conclusions: The enabling role of leaders (macrosystem level), the bridging role of practitioners (mesosystem level) and the unifying role of service users (microsystem level) all contributed to EN's success in Singapore. Understanding these roles helps us understand how staff at various levels can contribute to the adoption and adaptation of EN and similar complex innovations systemwide.

Keywords: Change management; HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION & MANAGEMENT; Organisation of health services; PUBLIC HEALTH; Quality in health care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: ELPL is the lead coordinator of the Esther Network Singapore who facilitated the implementation and adaptation of the innovation in Singapore. GYK is one of the Esther coaches. The remaining authors declare no other competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Refined programme theory for adoption and adaptation of the Esther Network (EN) model in Singapore. PCC, person-centred care.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Conceptual model for understanding the determinants of dissemination, diffusion and assimilation of an innovation in Singapore (the Esther Network (EN) Model).

References

    1. Osborne SP, Radnor Z, Strokosch K. Co-Production and the co-creation of value in public services: a suitable case for treatment? Public Management Review 2016;18:639–53. 10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927 - DOI
    1. Nelson EC, Batalden PB, Godfrey MM. Quality by design: a clinical microsystems approach. 1st ed.. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2007.
    1. World Health Organisation . Who global strategy on integrated people-centred health services 2016-2026. Available: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/180984/WHO_HIS_SDS_2015... [Accessed 17 Nov 2021].
    1. Ekman I, Swedberg K, Taft C, et al. . Person-centered care--ready for prime time. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2011;10:248–51. 10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2011.06.008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Håkansson Eklund J, Holmström IK, Kumlin T, et al. . "Same same or different?" A review of reviews of person-centered and patient-centered care. Patient Educ Couns 2019;102:3–11. 10.1016/j.pec.2018.08.029 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types