Background: The number of people suffering from one or more chronic conditions is rising, resulting in an increase in patients with complex health care demands. Interprofessional collaboration and the use of shared care plans support the management of complex health care demands of patients with chronic illnesses. This study aims to get an overview of the scientific literature on developing interprofessional shared care plans. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of the scientific literature regarding the development of interprofessional shared care plans. A systematic database search resulted in 45 articles being included, 5 of which were empirical studies concentrating purely on the care plan. Findings were synthesised using directed content analysis. Results: This review revealed three themes. The first theme was the format of the shared care plan, with the following elements: patient’s current state; goals and concerns; actions and interventions; and evaluation. The second theme concerned the development of shared care plans, and can be categorised as interpersonal, organisational and patient-related factors. The third theme covered tools, whose main function is to support professionals in sharing patient information without personal contact. Such tools relate to documentation of and communication about patient information. Conclusion: Care plan development is not a free-standing concept, but should be seen as the result of an underlying process of interprofessional collaboration between team members, including the patient. To integrate the patients’ perspectives into the care plans, their needs and values need careful consideration. This review indicates a need for new empirical studies examining the development and use of shared care plans and evaluating their effects.
Introduction: In March 2014, the New South Wales (NSW) Government (Australia) announced the NSW Integrated Care Strategy. In response, a family-centred, population-based, integrated care initiative for vulnerable families and their children in Sydney, Australia was developed. The initiative was called Healthy Homes and Neighbourhoods. A realist translational social epidemiology programme of research and collaborative design is at the foundation of its evaluation. Theory and Method: The UK Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework for evaluating complex health interventions was adapted. This has four components, namely 1) development, 2) feasibility/piloting, 3) evaluation and 4) implementation. We adapted the Framework to include: critical realist, theory driven, and continuous improvement approaches. The modified Framework underpins this research and evaluation protocol for Healthy Homes and Neighbourhoods. Discussion: The NSW Health Monitoring and Evaluation Framework did not make provisions for assessment of the programme layers of context, or the effect of programme mechanism at each level. We therefore developed a multilevel approach that uses mixed-method research to examine not only outcomes, but also what is working for whom and why.
LINK
Physiotherapy, Dietetics and Occupational Therapy have been collaborating over recent years to develop an optimal healthcare programme for patients with Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS). This case is an example of PICS symptomatology and focuses on the collaboration between Physiotherapy and Dietetics. What is PICS? Owing to healthcare improvements, more and more patients are surviving the intensive Care Unit (ICU), and recovery during and after ICU stay has been receiving more attention [1, 2]. Approximately 30% of the patients admitted to an ICU have persistent symptoms including muscle weakness, reduced walking ability, fatigue, concentration deficits, memory problems, malnutrition, sleep and mood disorders sometimes even years after discharge [3-8]. Since 2012, this combination of physical, cognitive and psychiatric manifestations and reduced quality of life after staying in an ICU has been recognised as Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS) [9]. The impact of PICS is often not limited to the patient as it may also impact the mental status of the patient’s immediate family. This is known as PICS-Family (PICS-F) [10-12]. Treatment of PICS: Approximately 80% of PICS patients need primary care physiotherapy. Physiotherapists and GPs are often the only primary care professionals involved in the recovery process of these patients after hospital discharge [13, 14]. Both patients and healthcare professionals report a number of difficulties, e.g. limited transmural continuity in healthcare, coordination of multidisciplinary activities, supportive treatment guidelines and specific knowledge of pathology, treatment and prognosis. Patients report that they are not adequately supported when resuming their professional activities and that medical and allied healthcare treatments do not fully meet their needs at that time [15-18]. The REACH project: In order to improve the situation, the REACH project (REhabilitation After Critical illness and Hospital discharge) was started in Amsterdam region in the Netherlands. Within REACH, a Community of Practice – consisting of professionals (physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dieticians), those who live or have lived with the condition and researchers – has developed a transmural rehab programme. A special attribute of this programme is the integration of the concept of “positive health”. The case in this article describes the treatment of a PICS patient treated within the REACH network.
