台灣醫療服務業正面臨人口結構變化、科技發展趨勢及消費者期待轉變的多重挑戰。隨著總生育率持續下降至全球最低水準，傳統以單一服務提供者為中心的醫療服務模式已無法滿足現代消費者對完整、整合、個人化醫療照護的需求。本研究以價值共創理論為基礎，探討醫療照護整合模式在產後照護服務的應用與成效。
本研究採用質性研究方法，以A婦產科診所、B產後護理之家與C月子餐有限公司為研究對象，透過深度訪談、參與觀察與文件分析，探討三家企業如何透過價值共創機制建立跨組織整合模式。研究期間涵蓋2022年8月至2024年12月，共進行16位利害關係人的深度訪談，包括醫師、護理師、營養師、產婦及家屬等多元觀點。
研究結果顯示，三家企業成功建構了醫療照護價值共創整合模式，包含五個核心構面：價值主張建構、資源動態整合、服務流程協同、品質統一管控與持續價值優化。整合實施後，A診所年營業收入從600萬元成長至4000萬元，成長幅度超過500%；B護理之家平均住房率從85%提升至95%，客戶滿意度維持在4.9/5.0；C月子餐公司日均供餐量從150份增長至400份，客戶續約率達100%。
本研究驗證了價值共創理論在醫療服務業跨組織整合的適用性，為中小型醫療機構提供了可行的整合策略與實施方案。研究建構的五構面整合模式不僅豐富了價值共創理論內容，也為產後照護服務業的創新發展提供了理論基礎與實務指導。

Taiwan's healthcare industry faces challenges from demographic changes and evolving consumer expectations. With declining fertility rates, traditional single-provider healthcare models cannot meet modern demands for comprehensive, integrated care. This study explores healthcare integration models in postnatal care services using value co-creation theory.
Using qualitative methods, this study examines Medical Institution A (obstetrics clinic), Postnatal Care Center B, and Confinement Meal Company C through in-depth interviews, participant observation, and document analysis. The research period spans August 2022 to December 2024, involving 16 stakeholders including physicians, nurses, nutritionists, mothers, and family members.
Results show successful construction of a healthcare value co-creation integration model with five core dimensions: value proposition development, dynamic resource integration, service process synergy, unified quality management, and continuous value optimization. Post-integration, Clinic A's revenue grew 500% (NT$6M to NT$40M), Center B's occupancy increased from 85% to 95% with 4.9/5.0 satisfaction, and Company C's daily meals grew from 150 to 400 portions with 100% renewal rate.
This study validates value co-creation theory's applicability in healthcare cross-organizational integration, providing practical strategies for small-medium medical institutions and theoretical foundation for postnatal care service innovation.

一、 英文文獻
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Grönroos, C., & Voima, P. (2013). Critical service logic: Making sense of value creation and co-creation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(2), 133-150.
Kodner, D. L., & Spreeuwenberg, C. (2002). Integrated care: Meaning, logic, applications, and implications--A discussion paper. International Journal of Integrated Care, 2(4), 1-6.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Harvard University Press.
Porter, M. E., & Lee, T. H. (2013). The strategy that will fix health care. Harvard Business Review, 91(10), 50-70.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). The future of competition: Co-creating unique value with customers. Harvard Business School Press.
Ramaswamy, V., & Ozcan, K. (2014). The co-creation paradigm. Stanford University Press.
Shortell, S. M., Gillies, R. R., Anderson, D. A., Erickson, K. M., & Mitchell, J. B. (2000). Remaking health care in America: The evolution of organized delivery systems (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Shortell, S. M., Wu, F. M., Lewis, V. A., Colla, C. H., & Fisher, E. S. (2014). A taxonomy of accountable care organizations for policy and practice. Health Services Research, 49(6), 1883-1899.
Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2015). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Wiley.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1-17.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5-23.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
二、 中文文獻
內政部統計處 (2023)。人口統計年報。內政部。
中華民國護理師護士公會全國聯合會（2023）。產後護理服務品質指標建構。護理師護士公會全聯會。
台灣醫務管理學會（2024）。台灣健康照護服務發展趨勢。台灣醫務管理雜誌，25(3)，45-62。
林佳蓉（2016）。產後護理之家服務創新模式之實証研究：服務藍圖觀點。元智大學工業工程與管理學系碩士論文。
彭朱如、王維元、張錦文、黃松共（1997）。從跨組織關係理論觀點探討醫院間的合作策略。中原學報，25(4)，1-16。
雷淑貞（2014）。台灣長期照護機構與醫療機構策略聯盟動機透過信任、程序公平對聯盟績效與未來承諾之影響。長榮大學醫務管理學系碩士論文。
衛生福利部（2023）。產後護理機構設置標準。衛生福利部。
國民健康署（2024）。整合照護政策白皮書。衛生福利部國民健康署。