122 CHAPTER 5 Table 1. Topics in FGDs and interviews General topics • General experiences with Solid Start within the organization/ municipality/ region • Involved parties • Collaboration between medical and social sector (in the formation of coalitions and in daily practice) • Facilitators: what went well, factors that facilitated development • Barriers: what went wrong, factors that impeded development • Needs for the future and priorities Year-specific topics 2019 (shortly after the start of the program in sept. 2018) • Transition: before and after implementation of Solid Start • Relation between previous/ current initiatives and Solid Start 2020 • Funding and financing • Objectives and monitoring • Knowledge exchange 2021 (shortly before the end of the initial program) • Effects/ added value of Solid Start • Continuity of the program • Involvement of experts-by-experience • Early detection (screening) • Support for professionals • Solid Start as example for other sectors? Data collection The qualitative data were collected online (2020 and 2021, as a consequence of COVID-19 regulations) or live (2019 and several interviews in 2021). The interview guide focused on the experiences with the implementation of the Dutch Solid Start program and included a series of fixed open questions that were similar in each interview or FGD, and flexible questions adapted to the type of respondents or year of data collection to reflect the progress of the Solid Start program. Table 1 provides an overview of the main topics. FGDs lasted between 70 to 110 min. Interviews lasted on average 35 min, ranging from 11 to 52 min. All individual interviews were held one-on-one, with some exceptions. The expert by experience who assisted with client recruitment was also present during these interviews with clients to provide reassurance to clients and ask supplementary questions to gain more meaningful insights. Additionally, 4 project leaders and advisors within the same coalition were interviewed together. Data analysis All interviews and FGDs were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed in MaxQDA. We conducted a thematic analysis based on deductive coding, while remaining open to add relevant elements emerging from the data. A coding frame was set based on the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC) by Valentijn et al. (2013). The RMIC was developed as a framework to describe integrated care in 6 interrelated dimensions (Figure 2). Integrated care, in our paper, refers to the collaborative efforts of multiple professionals and organizations across the medical and social care system to provide comprehensive, accessible, and coordinated care for the benefit of (future) parents and their children (37, 38). The RMIC outlines contact between client and care provider at microlevel (clinical integration), collaboration between professionals and organizations at mesolevel (professional- and organizational integration) and the wider policies and rules within the health system that influence collaboration at macrolevel (system integration). These levels are linked and enabled through supportive structural functions such as resources- and
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw