Background: The number of people with multiple chronic conditions demanding primary care services is increasing. To deal with the complex health care demands of these people, professionals from different disciplines collaborate. This study aims to explore influential factors regarding interprofessional collaboration related to care plan development in primary care. Methods: A qualitative study, including four semi-structured focus group interviews (n = 4). In total, a heterogeneous group of experts (n = 16) and health care professionals (n = 15) participated. Participants discussed viewpoints, barriers, and facilitators regarding interprofessional collaboration related to care plan development. The data were analysed by means of inductive content analysis. Results: The findings show a variety of factors influencing the interprofessional collaboration in developing a care plan. Factors can be divided into 5 key categories: (1) patient-related factors: active role, self-management, goals and wishes, membership of the team; (2) professional-related factors: individual competences, domain thinking, motivation; (3) interpersonal factors: language differences, knowing each other, trust and respect, and motivation; (4) organisational factors: structure, composition, time, shared vision, leadership and administrative support; and (5) external factors: education, culture, hierarchy, domain thinking, law and regulations, finance, technology and ICT. Conclusions: Improving interprofessional collaboration regarding care plan development calls for an integral approach including patient- and professional related factors, interpersonal, organisational, and external factors. Further, the leader of the team seems to play a key role in watching the patient perspective, organising and coordinating interprofessional collaborations, and guiding the team through developments. The results of this study can be used as input for developing tools and interventions targeted at executing and improving interprofessional collaboration related to care plan development.
DOCUMENT
A Meta-Model of Interprofessional Development is proposed as an integrated theory-based and procedure-centered roadmap for interprofessional collaboration. The Model is designed to inform and connect interprofessional priorities and integrate perspectives of interprofessional practice, education and research. Its purpose is to provide a comprehensive and integrated guide to enhance interprofessional collaboration given any context and/or purpose. The model proposes an operational and a strategic dimension that build on a diversity of profession-specific expertise. These dimensions consist of developmental phases related to one or more interprofessional priorities. The operational dimension and the strategic dimension influence each other. All phases influence practice, education and research perspectives. The meta-model states that each interprofessional priority is subject to practice, teachable through education, and verifiable by science. While interprofessional activity may have a common ground; priorities do result in different professional contributions and activities depending on perspective, context, and purpose. This common ground of interprofessional priorities consists of negotiating and appreciating professional identity related to role clarity, shared problem domains, different and complementary approaches to solve a shared problem, interprofessional planning and execution of an interprofessional plan. In addition, interprofessional collaboration depends on other priorities such as engagement, effort and influence at individual, collective and systemic levels. These priorities involve interprofessional identity formation, networks and/or community of practice challenges and the systemic influence of power, policy and politics. Developing interprofessional collaboration is a complex process and the authors hope this meta-model will help students, educators, practitioners and researchers unpack the complexities of interprofessional collaboration.
LINK
Background: Due to multimorbidity and geriatric problems, older people often require both psychosocial and medical care. Collaboration between medical and social professionals is a prerequisite to deliver high-quality care for community-living older people. Effective, safe, and person-centered care relies on skilled interprofessional collaboration and practice. Little is known about interprofessional education to increase interprofessional collaboration in practice (IPCP) in the context of community care for older people. This study examines the feasibility of the implementation of an IPCP program in three community districts and determines its potential to increase interprofessional collaboration between primary healthcare professionals caring for older people. Method: A feasibility study was conducted to determine the acceptability and feasibility of data collection and analysis regarding interprofessional collaboration in network development. A questionnaire was used to measure the learning experience and the acquisition of knowledge and skills regarding the program. Network development was assessed by distributing a social network survey among professionals attending the program as well as professionals not attending the program at baseline and 5.5 months after. Network development was determined by calculating the number, reciprocity, value, and diversity of contacts between professionals using social network analysis. Results: The IPCP program was found to be instructive and the knowledge and skills gained were applicable in practice. Social network analysis was feasible to conduct and revealed a spill-over effect regarding network development. Program participants, as well as non-program participants, had larger, more reciprocal, and more diverse interprofessional networks than they did before the program. Conclusions: This study showed the feasibility of implementing an IPCP program in terms of acceptability, feasibility of data collection, and social network analysis to measure network development, and indicated potential to increase interprofessional collaboration between primary healthcare professionals. Both program participants and non-program participants developed a larger, more collaborative, and diverse interprofessional network.
DOCUMENT
Background: The number of people with multiple chronic conditions requiring primary care services increases. Professionals from different disciplines collaborate and coordinate care to deal with the complex health care needs. There is lack of information on current practices regarding interprofessional team (IPT) meetings. Objectives: This study aimed to improve our understanding of the process of interprofessional collaboration in primary care team meetings in the Netherlands by observing the current practice and exploring personal opinions. Methods. Qualitative study involving observations of team meetings and interviews with participants. Eight different IPT meetings (n = 8) in different primary care practices were observed by means of video recordings. Experiences were explored by conducting individual semi-structured interviews (n = 60) with participants (i.e. health care professionals from different disciplines) of the observed team meetings. The data were analysed by means of content analysis. Results: Most participants expressed favourable opinions about their team meetings. However, observations showed that team meetings were more or less hectic, and lacked a clear structure and team coordinator or leader. There appears to be a discrepancy between findings from observations and interviews. From the interviews, four main themes were extracted: (1) Team structure and composition, (2) Patient-centredness, (3) Interaction and (4) Attitude and motivation. Conclusion: IPT meetings could benefit from improvements in structure, patient-centredness and leadership by the chairpersons. Given the discrepancy between observations and interviews, it would appear useful to improve team members’ awareness of aspects that could be improved before training them in dealing with specific challenges.
DOCUMENT
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.
DOCUMENT
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.
DOCUMENT
Research on interprofessional identity using the Extended Professional Identity Theory (EPIT) has shown promising results in measuring this identity, predicting interprofessional collaboration, and improving team outcomes. However, EPIT-based interprofessional identity has not been studied in Türkiye due to the absence of a Turkish version of the Extended Professional Identity Scale (EPIS). We aimed to develop and validate a Turkish EPIS, the EPIS-TR, and explore interprofessional identities across eight different professions. A cross-cultural adaptation of EPIS was made by linguistic validation, followed by analysis of psychometric properties using a sample of students from four Turkish universities and eight professions/programs (n = 405). Confirmatory factor analysis and reliability analyses were performed. Differences between professions were explored with ANOVA and a post hoc test. Three out of seven goodness-of-fit indices showed acceptable fit (x2/df =.004; RMSEA =.07; GFI =.94), and others showed excellent fit (SRMR =.04; AGFI =.91; CFI =.97; NNFI =.96). The internal consistency of the EPIS-TR is.93. The EPIS-TR scale has strong psychometric properties. The construct validity of the EPIS-TR was similar to that of the original version. The interprofessional identity scores of the different professions were mostly similar. Based on these findings, the EPIS-TR is well suited for measuring interprofessional identity.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: Malnutrition and sarcopenia require dietetic and physiotherapy interventions. In this study, we aimed to compare interprofessional identity of dietitians and physiotherapists, as well as attitudes towards, facilitators and barriers for, and occurrence of interprofessional treatment of malnutrition and sarcopenia by both professions. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed from December 4, 2021 until January 31, 2022 through an international online network platform for professionals (LinkedIn). Practitioners working as dietitian or physiotherapist in a healthcare setting were eligible for participation. Outcome measures concerned perceptions regarding shared problem domains, interprofessional treatment, attitudes towards interprofessional treatment, interprofessional identity, facilitators, and barriers. A Chi2-test, Mann–Whitney U-test, and Spearman’s Rho correlation were calculated. Results: Data from 53 physiotherapists and 48 dietitians were included. Malnutrition is considered a shared problem domain by both professions (U = 1248.000; p = 0.858). While sarcopenia is treated by both professions (U = 1260.000; p = 0.927), physiotherapists consider sarcopenia more often a shared problem domain compared to dietitians (U = 1003.000; p = 0.044). Attitudes towards interprofessional treatment were mostly positive (73%, n = 35 and 87%, n = 46 respectively). Interprofessional identity of dietitians was lower compared to physiotherapists (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.3 respectively; U = 875.000, p = 0.007). This was explained by lower interprofessional belonging (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.8 respectively; U = 771.000, p < 0.001) and lower interprofessional commitment (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.3 respectively; U = 942.500, p = 0.023). Interprofessional identity was correlated with efficient means of communication (r = 0.30, p = 0.003) and bureaucracy (r = −0.21, p = 0.034). Other barriers reported included available time, financial compensation, interprofessional knowledge, and obtaining extra care. Most reported facilitators concerned role clarity, clarity of expertise, and willingness of others to collaborate. Conclusion: Dietitians and physiotherapists have different interprofessional identities, but both are advocates of interprofessional treatment. Both professions mostly treat malnutrition and sarcopenia individually and have different perceptions regarding sarcopenia as shared problem domain. Facilitators were mainly related to clarity and commitment while barriers were mainly related to resources.
DOCUMENT
PURPOSE: Malnutrition and sarcopenia require dietetic and physiotherapy interventions. In this study, we aimed to compare interprofessional identity of dietitians and physiotherapists, as well as attitudes towards, facilitators and barriers for, and occurrence of interprofessional treatment of malnutrition and sarcopenia by both professions.METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed from December 4, 2021 until January 31, 2022 through an international online network platform for professionals (LinkedIn). Practitioners working as dietitian or physiotherapist in a healthcare setting were eligible for participation. Outcome measures concerned perceptions regarding shared problem domains, interprofessional treatment, attitudes towards interprofessional treatment, interprofessional identity, facilitators, and barriers. A Chi 2-test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Spearman's Rho correlation were calculated. RESULTS: Data from 53 physiotherapists and 48 dietitians were included. Malnutrition is considered a shared problem domain by both professions ( U = 1248.000; p = 0.858). While sarcopenia is treated by both professions ( U = 1260.000; p = 0.927), physiotherapists consider sarcopenia more often a shared problem domain compared to dietitians ( U = 1003.000; p = 0.044). Attitudes towards interprofessional treatment were mostly positive (73%, n = 35 and 87%, n = 46 respectively). Interprofessional identity of dietitians was lower compared to physiotherapists (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.3 respectively; U = 875.000, p = 0.007). This was explained by lower interprofessional belonging (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.8 respectively; U = 771.000, p < 0.001) and lower interprofessional commitment (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.3 respectively; U = 942.500, p = 0.023). Interprofessional identity was correlated with efficient means of communication ( r = 0.30, p = 0.003) and bureaucracy ( r = -0.21, p = 0.034). Other barriers reported included available time, financial compensation, interprofessional knowledge, and obtaining extra care. Most reported facilitators concerned role clarity, clarity of expertise, and willingness of others to collaborate. CONCLUSION: Dietitians and physiotherapists have different interprofessional identities, but both are advocates of interprofessional treatment. Both professions mostly treat malnutrition and sarcopenia individually and have different perceptions regarding sarcopenia as shared problem domain. Facilitators were mainly related to clarity and commitment while barriers were mainly related to resources.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: It is unknown whether interprofessional identity is able to explain interprofessional behaviours. Extended professional identity theory provides clues by combining two psychological identity approaches. The aim of this study is to investigate whether interprofessional identity is a source for intrinsic motivation towards interprofessional collaboration related to wider group membership. Methods: Participants of this double-blinded study were 47 dentistry and 41 dental hygiene students (86.3% response) without interprofessional education (IPE) experience. Group productivity was used as indicator of group effort and equal communication as indication for interprofessional direction. The extended professional identity scale (EPIS) was used to measure interprofessional identity eight weeks prior to a mandatory IPE course. Based on EPIS levels, students were assigned to a low or high interprofessional identity group condition. Subsequently, 12 interprofessional teams (four to five members) were randomly composed per condition. Each group received eight problems (regarding roles, responsibilities and collaborative practice) for which they were expected to provide up to 10 solutions. Six trained psychologists rated the validity of solutions after which the percentage of solutions per group was calculated. Additionally, the psychologists rated interprofessional direction by observing team communication (asking questions, topic control, prosocial formulations, and speech frequency) during the second group meeting. Results: No interprofessional identity differences were found with regard to gender and profession. The mean difference between groups with low versus high interprofessional identity was 0.5 (M = 3.4; SD = 0.5 and M = 3.9, SD = 0.4, respectively), t = −5.880, p < 0.001. Groups with high identity generated more solutions compared to low identity groups (91.5% vs. 86.4%), t = −2938, p = 0.004. The correlation between individual interprofessional identity and group effort was significant, r = 0.22, p = 0.036. Groups with high identity showed more interprofessional direction, t = −2.160, p = 0.034. Discussion: Interprofessional identity has a positive effect on congruent interprofessional behaviours after 10 weeks. More research is required to understand interprofessional identity in relation to performance in education and work.
DOCUMENT
