Factors that affect the implementation of an integrated care programme for older people with different frailty levels: a qualitative study of commissioners and provider stakeholders.

Introduction: The NHS has made it mandatory for General Practices in England to proactively identify and manage older people with moderate and severe frailty since the GMS contract of 2017/2018. In Luton, stakeholders developed the Luton Framework of Frailty (LFF) to implement this national policy. The aim of this study was to explore the factors that affect the implementation of this national policy at a local level.

Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 18 commissioners and service providers, all of whom were involved in providing services for older people with different frailty levels (OPDFL). Purposive and snowball sampling methods were used, with thematic analysis used for data analysis.

Results: Two main themes with several sub-themes were found. The first theme was the tension within existing national policy initiatives to provide integrated care services for OPDFL, which illuminated their strengths and limitations. Participants felt that new initiatives, such as the development of Primary Care Networks and Enhanced Health in Care Homes, have improved primary care coordination. However, the traditional reactive approach for managing older people who are frail was thought to be counterproductive, when an approach that focused on prevention and early intervention would have been better. The second theme concerned the contextual factors that affect implementation of integrated care. These included having key leaders at a local level, the requirement for more funding, as well as the need for good working relationships among service providers. However, the lack of awareness about the care pathways among GPs was thought to be a reason for the variation in the implementation of the LFF. The COVID-19 pandemic was perceived as a challenge for the implementation of the LFF. Finally, polices were thought to succeed only if more resources are provided, while the term frailty should be used with caution due to the negative connotations of OPDFL towards this term.

Conclusion: The implementation of an integrated care programme for OPDFL can be affected by several factors. Having proactive national policies that facilitate coordination and, having key leaders locally, the need for more funding, and good working relationships, are some of the contextual factors that could facilitate a successful implementation. In contrast, the lack of awareness of the care pathways that have been introduced locally, insufficient resources to deliver the programmes efficiently and a lack of careful consideration of how the term frailty is used could hinder this being put into practice.