IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i14p8462-d860262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using the Soft Systems Methodology to Link Healthcare and Long-Term Care Delivery Systems: A Case Study of Community Policy Coordinator Activities in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Yuko Goto

    (Department of Home Care and Regional Liaison Promotion, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Obu 474-8511, Aichi, Japan)

  • Hisayuki Miura

    (Department of Home Care and Regional Liaison Promotion, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Obu 474-8511, Aichi, Japan)

Abstract

Due to the rapidly aging population in Japan, the government has been attempting to link the healthcare delivery system with the long-term care delivery system. However, there are complex challenges that must be overcome to link the two systems. A new methodology should be used to organize complex community challenges and propose solutions. This study aimed to visualize the unique challenges and worldviews of interested parties in each community, using the soft systems methodology (SSM). We aimed to visualize issues and clarify challenges associated with linking the healthcare and long-term care delivery systems; in turn, clarifying the thought process behind solution proposals. We gathered information regarding those who are actively linking these systems in communities in a Japanese municipality (community care coordinators) and organized the information according to the SSM procedure. By organizing information using the SSM, we were able to summarize the present situations of the community healthcare and long-term care delivery systems, visualize issues, clarify challenges associated with linking these two systems, and propose solutions. The SSM may be useful in organizing complex community information and deriving solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuko Goto & Hisayuki Miura, 2022. "Using the Soft Systems Methodology to Link Healthcare and Long-Term Care Delivery Systems: A Case Study of Community Policy Coordinator Activities in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-9, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8462-:d:860262
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8462/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8462/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P Checkland & M Winter, 2006. "Process and content: two ways of using SSM," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(12), pages 1435-1441, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.
    2. Mirna de Lima Medeiros & Leonardo Augusto Amaral Terra & João Luiz Passador, 2020. "Geographical indications and territorial development: A soft‐system methodology analysis of the Serro Case," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 82-96, January.
    3. Sydelko, Pamela & Midgley, Gerald & Espinosa, Angela, 2021. "Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: Creating a common, cross-agency understanding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 250-263.
    4. Luis Arturo Pinzón‐Salcedo & Juanita Bernal‐Alvarado & Eloisa María Ramírez‐Franco & Mario Alejandro Pesca‐Perdomo, 2023. "Do jaguars of the Amazon rainforest have a systemic perspective?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 3-15, January.
    5. Majid Eskafi & Reza Fazeli & Ali Dastgheib & Poonam Taneja & Gudmundur F. Ulfarsson & Ragnheidur I. Thorarinsdottir & Gunnar Stefansson, 2020. "A value-based definition of success in adaptive port planning: a case study of the Port of Isafjordur in Iceland," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(3), pages 403-431, September.
    6. Foote, J. & Midgley, G. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, A. & Hepi, M. & Earl-Goulet, J., 2021. "Systemic evaluation of community environmental management programmes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 207-224.
    7. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    8. Georgiou, Ion, 2012. "Messing about in transformations: Structured systemic planning for systemic solutions to systemic problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(2), pages 392-406.
    9. J Davis & A MacDonald & L White, 2010. "Problem-structuring methods and project management: an example of stakeholder involvement using Hierarchical Process Modelling methodology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(6), pages 893-904, June.
    10. M. Yusuf S. Barusman & Appin Purisky Redaputri, 2018. "Decision Making Model of Electric Power Fulfillment in Lampung Province Using Soft System Methodology," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(1), pages 128-136.
    11. Ramin Sepehrirad & Ali Rajabzadeh & Adel Azar & Behrouz Zarei, 2017. "A Soft Systems Methodology Approach to Occupational Cancer Control Problem: a Case Study of the Ministry of Petroleum of Iran," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 609-626, December.
    12. Laouris, Yiannis & Romm, Norma RA, 2022. "Structured dialogical design as a problem structuring method illustrated in a Re-invent democracy project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 301(3), pages 1072-1087.
    13. Kazakov, Rossen & Howick, Susan & Morton, Alec, 2021. "Managing complex adaptive systems: A resource/agent qualitative modelling perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(1), pages 386-400.
    14. Xuhui Cong & Li Ma, 2018. "Performance Evaluation of Public-Private Partnership Projects from the Perspective of Efficiency, Economic, Effectiveness, and Equity: A Study of Residential Renovation Projects in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-21, June.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8462-:d:860262. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.