Adopting standardized cancer patient pathways as a policy at different organizational levels in the Swedish Health System.

BACKGROUND: Standardized cancer patient pathways as a new policy has been adopted in healthcare to improve the quality of cancer care. Within the health systems, actors at different levels manage the adoption of new policies to develop healthcare. The various actors on different levels play an important role and influence the policy adoption process. Thus, knowledge about how these actors use strategies when adopting cancer patient pathways as a policy in the health system becomes central. METHOD: The study's aim was to explore how actors at different organizational levels in the health system adopted cancer patient pathways. Our overarching case was the Swedish health system at the national, regional, and local levels. Constructivist Grounded Theory Method was used to collect and analyze qualitative interviews with persons working in organizations directly involved in adopting cancer patient pathways at each level. Twelve individual and nine group interviews were conducted including 53 participants. RESULTS: Organizational actors at three different levels used distinct strategies during the adoption of cancer patient pathways: acting as-missionaries, fixers, and doers. Acting as missionaries consisted of preaching the idea of cancer patient pathways and framing it with a common purpose to agree upon. Acting as fixers entailed creating a space to put cancer patient pathways into practice and overcome challenges to this. Acting as doers comprised balancing breadth and speed in healthcare provision with not being involved in the development of cancer patient pathways for the local context. These strategies were not developed in isolation from the other organizational levels but rather, each level interacted with one another. CONCLUSIONS: When adopting new policies, it is important to be aware of the different strategies and actors at various organizational levels in health systems. Even when actors on different levels developed separate strategies, if these contribute to fulfilling the four domains of inter-organizational collaboration, they can work well together to adopt new policies. Our study highlighted that the application of two domains was lacking, which meant that local actors were not sufficiently involved in collaboration, thus constricting the local use and optimization of cancer patient pathways in practice.

The association between sociodemographic factors and time to diagnosis for colorectal cancer in northern Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether sociodemographic factors, including distance to hospital, were associated with differences in the diagnostic interval and the treatment interval for colorectal cancer in northern Sweden. METHODS: Data were retrieved from the Swedish cancer register on patients (n = 446) diagnosed in three northern regions during 2017-2018, then linked to data from Statistics Sweden and medical records. Also, Google maps was used to map the distance between patients' place of residence and nearest hospital. The different time intervals were analysed using Mann-Whitney U-test and Cox regression. RESULTS: Differences in time to diagnosis were found between groups for income and distance to hospital, favouring those with higher income and shorter distance. The unadjusted regression analysis showed higher income to be associated with more rapid diagnosis (HR 1.004, CI 1.001-1.007). This association remained in the fully adjusted model for income (HR 1.004, CI 1.000-1.008), but not for distance. No differences between sociodemographic groups were found in the treatment interval. CONCLUSION: Higher income and shorter distance to hospital were in the unadjusted models associated with shorter time to diagnosis for patients with CRC in northern Sweden. The association remained for income when adjusting for other variables even though the difference was small.

Merging existing practices with new ones: the adjustment of organizational routines to using cancer patient pathways in primary healthcare.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of new tools can bring unintended consequences for organizational routines. Cancer Patient Pathways (CPP) were introduced into the Swedish healthcare system in 2015 to shorten time to diagnosis and treatment. Primary healthcare (PHC) plays a central role since cancer diagnosis often begins in PHC units. Our study aimed to understand how PHC units adjusted organizational routines to utilizing CPPs. METHOD: Six PHC units of varied size from both urban and rural areas in northern Sweden were included. Grounded theory method was used to collect and analyse group interviews at each unit. Nine group interviews with nurses and physicians, for a total of 41 participants, were performed between March and November 2019. The interviews focused on CPPs as tools, the PHC units' routines and providers' experiences with using CPPs in their daily work. RESULTS: Our analysis captured how PHC units adjusted organizational routines to utilizing CPPs by fusing existing practices with new practices to offer better quality of care. Specifically, three overarching organizational routines within the PHC units were identified. First, Manoeuvring diverse patient needs with easier patient flow, the PHC units handled the diverse needs of the population while simultaneously drawing upon CPPs to ease the patient flow within the healthcare system. Second, (Dis) integrating internal know-how, the PHC units drew upon internal competence even when PHC know-how was not taken into account by those driving the CPP initiative. Third, Coping with unequal relationships toward secondary care, the PHC units dealt with being in an unequal position while adopting CPPs instead further decreased possibilities to influence decision-making between care-levels. CONCLUSION: Adopting CPPs as a tool within PHC units brought various unintended consequences in organizational routines. Our study from northern Sweden illustrates that the PHC know-how needs to be integrated into the healthcare system to improve the use of new tools as CPP. Further, the relationships between different levels of care should be taken in account when introducing new tools for healthcare. Also, when adopting innovations, unintended consequences need to be further explored empirically in diverse healthcare contexts internationally in order to generate deeper knowledge in the research area.