IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v79y2020ics014971891930285x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating complex interventions in real context: Logic analysis of a case management program for frequent users of healthcare services

Author

Listed:
  • Hudon, Catherine
  • Chouinard, Maud-Christine
  • Brousselle, Astrid
  • Bisson, Mathieu
  • Danish, Alya

Abstract

Case management programs for frequent users of healthcare services are complex interventions which implementation and application are challenging to evaluate. The aim of this article was to conduct a logic analysis to evaluate a case management program for frequent users of healthcare services. The study proceeded in three phases: 1) establishing causal links between the program’s components by the construction of a logic model, 2) developing an integrated framework from a realistic synthesis, and 3) making a new reading of the case management program in regard of the integrated framework. The study demonstrated, on one hand, strengths and weaknesses of the actual case management program, and, on the other hand, how logic analysis can create a constructive dialogue between theory and practice. The evaluative process with decision-makers, clinicians and patients has helped to make connexions between theory, practice, experience and services organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Hudon, Catherine & Chouinard, Maud-Christine & Brousselle, Astrid & Bisson, Mathieu & Danish, Alya, 2020. "Evaluating complex interventions in real context: Logic analysis of a case management program for frequent users of healthcare services," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:79:y:2020:i:c:s014971891930285x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101753
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014971891930285X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101753?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tremblay, Marie-Claude & Brousselle, Astrid & Richard, Lucie & Beaudet, Nicole, 2013. "Defining, illustrating and reflecting on logic analysis with an example from a professional development program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 64-73.
    2. Greene, Jennifer C., 2013. "Logic and evaluation theory," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 71-73.
    3. Brousselle, Astrid & Lamothe, Lise & Mercier, Celine & Perreault, Michel, 2007. "Beyond the limitations of best practices: How logic analysis helped reinterpret dual diagnosis guidelines," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 94-104, February.
    4. Brousselle, Astrid & Champagne, François, 2011. "Program theory evaluation: Logic analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 69-78, February.
    5. Patton, Michael Quinn & Horton, Douglas, 2008. "Utilization-focused evaluation for agricultural innovation," ILAC Briefs 52533, Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Breton, Mylaine & Smithman, Mélanie Ann & Kreindler, Sara A. & Jbilou, Jalila & Wong, Sabrina T. & Gard Marshall, Emily & Sasseville, Martin & Sutherland, Jason M. & Crooks, Valorie A. & Shaw, Jay & C, 2021. "Designing centralized waiting lists for attachment to a primary care provider: Considerations from a logic analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. Desjardins, Émilie & Sultan-Taïeb, Hélène & St-Hilaire, France & Vézina, Nicole & Ledoux, Élise & Naji, Rita & Bélanger, Patricia, 2023. "Implementation process evaluation of an ergonomic train the trainer program: How to learn from mechanisms and the temporal structure of processes?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Attari, Mahdi Yousfi Nejad & Moslemi Beirami, Ali Asghar & Ala, Ali & Jami, Ensiye Neyshabouri, 2023. "Resolving the practical factors in the healthcare system management by considering a combine approach of AHP and ANP methods," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tremblay, Marie-Claude & Brousselle, Astrid & Richard, Lucie & Beaudet, Nicole, 2013. "Defining, illustrating and reflecting on logic analysis with an example from a professional development program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 64-73.
    2. Cartier, Yuri & Benmarhnia, Tarik & Brousselle, Astrid, 2015. "Tool for assessing health and equity impacts of interventions modifying air quality in urban environments," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1-9.
    3. Abdul-Manan, Amir F.N. & Baharuddin, Azizan & Chang, Lee Wei, 2015. "Application of theory-based evaluation for the critical analysis of national biofuel policy: A case study in Malaysia," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 39-49.
    4. Breton, Mylaine & Smithman, Mélanie Ann & Kreindler, Sara A. & Jbilou, Jalila & Wong, Sabrina T. & Gard Marshall, Emily & Sasseville, Martin & Sutherland, Jason M. & Crooks, Valorie A. & Shaw, Jay & C, 2021. "Designing centralized waiting lists for attachment to a primary care provider: Considerations from a logic analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Tim Benijts, 2014. "A Business Sustainability Model for Government Corporations. A Belgian Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 204-216, March.
    6. Lifshitz, Chen Chana, 2017. "Fostering employability among youth at-risk in a multi-cultural context: Insights from a pilot intervention program," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 20-34.
    7. LaVelle, John M. & Davies, Randall, 2021. "Seeking consensus: Defining foundational concepts for a graduate level introductory program evaluation course," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    8. Deane, Kelsey L. & Harré, Niki, 2014. "Program theory-driven evaluation science in a youth development context," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 61-70.
    9. Melz, Heidi & Fromknecht, Anne E. & Masters, Loren D. & Richards, Tammy & Sun, Jing, 2023. "Incorporating multiple data sources to assess changes in organizational capacity in child welfare systems," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Wingate, Lori A. & Smith, Nick L. & Perk, Emma, 2018. "The project vita: A dynamic knowledge management tool," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 22-27.
    11. Metta, Matteo & Ciliberti, Stefano & Obi, Chinedu & Bartolini, Fabio & Klerkx, Laurens & Brunori, Gianluca, 2022. "An integrated socio-cyber-physical system framework to assess responsible digitalisation in agriculture: A first application with Living Labs in Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    12. Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi & Nieuwenhuis, Sonja & Ologun, Adesoji & Mortimore, Gordon & Mpakateni, Martin, 2019. "Embedding value-for-money in practice: a case study of a health pooled fund programme implemented in conflict-affected South Sudan," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 101766, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Wu, Huang & Shen, Jianping & Jones, Jeffrey & Gao, Xingyuan & Zheng, Yunzheng & Krenn, Huilan Y., 2019. "Using logic model and visualization to conduct portfolio evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 69-75.
    14. Arbour, Ghislain, 2020. "Teaching programme evaluation: A problem of knowledge," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    15. Jan Činčera & Grzegorz Mikusiński & Bohuslav Binka & Luis Calafate & Cristina Calheiros & Alexandra Cardoso & Marcus Hedblom & Michael Jones & Alex Koutsouris & Clara Vasconcelos & Katarzyna Iwińska, 2019. "Managing Diversity: The Challenges of Inter-University Cooperation in Sustainability Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    16. Daigneault, Pierre-Marc, 2014. "Taking stock of four decades of quantitative research on stakeholder participation and evaluation use: A systematic map," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 171-181.
    17. Gisela Cardoso & Elizabeth Moreira Santos & Yibeltal Kiflie & Kifle Woldemichael & Suzanne Wilson & Wuleta Lemma, 2017. "Strategic analysis of tuberculosis prevention and control actions in Brazil and Ethiopia: one size fits all?," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 62(2), pages 305-315, March.
    18. Picciotto, Robert, 2019. "Is evaluation obsolete in a post-truth world?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 88-96.
    19. Kupiec, Tomasz, 2022. "Does evaluation quality matter? Quantitative analysis of the use of evaluation findings in the field of cohesion policy in Poland," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    20. Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi & Nieuwenhuis, Sonja & Ologun, Adesoji & Mortimore, Gordon & Mpakateni, Martin, 2019. "Embedding value-for-money in practice: A case study of a health pooled fund programme implemented in conflict-affected South Sudan," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:79:y:2020:i:c:s014971891930285x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.