Interprofessional communication and collaboration during hospitalisation is critically important to provide safe and effective care. Clinical rounds are an essential interprofessional process in which the clinical problems of patients are discussed on a daily basis. The objective of this exploratory study was to identify healthcare professionals’ perspectives on the “ideal” interprofessional round for patients in a university teaching hospital. Three focus groups with medical residents, registered nurses, medical specialists, and quality improvement officers were held. We used a descriptive method of content analysis. The findings indicate that it is important for professionals to consider how team members and patients are involved in the decision-making process during the clinical round and how current social and spatial structures can affect communication and collaboration between the healthcare team and the patient. Specific aspects of communication and collaboration are identified for improving effective interprofessional communication and collaboration during rounds.
Background: As our global population ages, malnutrition and sarcopenia are increasingly prevalent. Given the multifactorial nature of these conditions, effective management of (risk of) malnutrition and sarcopenia necessitates interprofessional collaboration (IPC). This study aimed to understand primary and social care professionals’ barriers, facilitators, preferences, and needs regarding interprofessional management of (risk of) malnutrition and sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We conducted a qualitative, Straussian, grounded theory study. We collected data using online semi-structured focus group interviews. A grounded theory data analysis was performed using open, axial, and selective coding, followed by developing a conceptual model. Results: We conducted five online focus groups with 28 professionals from the primary and social care setting. We identified five selective codes: 1) Information exchange between professionals must be smooth, 2) Regular consultation on the tasks, responsibilities, and extent of IPC is needed; 3) Thorough involvement of older adults in IPC is preferred; 4) Coordination of interprofessional care around the older adult is needed; and 5) IPC must move beyond healthcare systems. Our conceptual model illustrates three interconnected dimensions in interprofessional collaboration: professionals, infrastructure, and older adults. Conclusion: Based on insights from professionals, interprofessional collaboration requires synergy between professionals, infra-structure, and older adults. Professionals need both infrastructure elements and the engagement of older adults for successful interprofessional collaboration.
Background: Patient involvement in interprofessional education (IPE) is a new approach in fostering person-centeredness and collaborative competencies in undergraduate students. We developed the Patient As a Person (PAP-)module to facilitate students in learning from experts by experience (EBEs) living with chronic conditions, in an interprofessional setting. This study aimed to explore the experiences of undergraduate students, EBEs and facilitators with the PAP-module and formulate recommendations on the design and organization of patient involvement in IPE. Methods: We collected data from students, EBEs and facilitators, through eight semi-structured focus group interviews and two individual interviews (N = 51). The interviews took place at Maastricht University, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences and Regional Training Center Leeuwenborgh. Conventional content analysis revealed key themes. Results: Students reported that learning from EBEs in an interprofessional setting yielded a more comprehensive approach and made them empathize with EBEs. Facilitators found it challenging to address multiple demands from students from different backgrounds and diverse EBEs. EBEs were motivated to improve the personcentredness of health care and welcomed a renewed sense of purpose. Conclusions: This study yielded six recommendations: (a) students from various disciplines visit an EBE to foster a comprehensive approach, (b) groups of at least two students visit EBEs, (c) students may need aftercare for which facilitators should be receptive, (d) EBEs need clear instruction on their roles, (e) multiple EBEs in one session create diversity in perspectives and (f) training programmes and peer-to-peer sessions for facilitators help them to interact with diverse students and EBEs.
