Managing the intensive care unit: physician-nurse collaboration

Examining the extent and factors associated with interprofessional teamwork in primary care settings

Despite growing emphasis on adopting team-based models of primary care to facilitate patient access to a diverse range of care providers, our understanding of team functioning within primary care teams remains limited. This study examined interprofessional teamwork within primary care practices (Family Health Teams [FHT] and Community Health Centers - [CHC]) in Ontario and explored team-level and organizational factors associated with interprofessional teamwork. Interprofessional teamwork was measured using the Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool (CPAT), which was completed by providers in each participating team. The CPAT responses of 988 providers representing on average 12 professions (sd = 2.1) across 66 teams (44 FHTs and 22 CHCs) were included in the analysis. The average CPAT score was 46.6 (sd = 2.5). CHCs had significantly higher CPAT scores than FHTs (m_diff = 1.7, p = .02). Using diverse communication mechanisms to share information, increasing quality improvement capacities, and age of practice, had a statistically significant positive association with CPAT scores. Increasing team size, using centralized administrative processes, a high level of information exchange, and having a mixed governance board were significantly negatively associated with CPAT score. Findings illustrate factors associated with interprofessional teamwork and offer insight into the comparative performance of two team-based primary care models in Ontario.

Image and perception of physicians as barriers to inter-disciplinary cooperation? - the example of German occupational health physicians in the rehabilitation process: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

In the German rehabilitation system, primary care physicians (PCPs), occupational health physicians (OPs), and rehabilitation physicians (RPs) fulfill different distinct functions and roles. While effective cooperation can improve outcomes of rehabilitation, the cooperation between these groups of stakeholders has been criticized as lacking or insufficient. This article proposes an approach to understand the low levels of cooperation by examining the role of group perception and group identity in intra-professional cooperation as a barrier to cooperation between physicians in different roles. Group perception was evaluated in terms of (1) negative views about another group of medical specialists and (2) differences between the perception of members and non-members of a medical specialty group. To examine this issue, we focused on the role of OPs in the German rehabilitation process.

METHODS

We implemented a qualitative study design with eight focus group discussions with PCPs, OPs, RPs, and patients (two focus group discussions per stakeholder group; 4-10 participants) and qualitative content analysis. We used the Social Identity Approach by Tajfel and Turner as a theoretical underpinning.

RESULTS

While all protagonists reported a positive perception of their own professional group, we found numerous negative perceptions about other groups, especially regarding OPs. Negative perceptions of OPs included 1) apparent conflict of interest between employer and employee, 2) lack of commitment to patient outcomes, 3) lack of useful specialized knowledge which could have a bearing on rehabilitation outcomes, and 4) distrust on the part of their patients. We also found divergent perceptions regarding roles, responsibilities, and capabilities among the specialist groups. Both negative and conflicting perceptions about roles were characterized as barriers to cooperation by study participants.

CONCLUSION

This example of cooperation between RPs, OPs, and PCPs suggests that negative and diverging perceptions about an out-group could create barriers in intra-professional and inter-disciplinary cooperation between physicians. These perspectives might also be useful in explaining problems at intersections between different specialties. We suggest examining the inter-group dimension of perception-based barriers to cooperation in future interventions to overcome problems caused by intra-professional and inter-disciplinary conflicts in addition to other barriers (i.e. organizational hurdles).

The function of a medical director in healthcare institutions: a master or a servant

The function of a medical director is presented along with features of efficiency and deficiencies from the perspective of healthcare system improvement. A MEDLINE/Pubmed research was performed using the terms “medical director” and “director”, and 50 relevant articles were selected. Institutional healthcare quality is closely related to the medical director efficiency and deficiency, and a critical discussion of his or her function is presented along with a focus on the institutional policies, protocols, and procedures. The relationship between the medical director and the executive director is essential in order to implement a successful healthcare program, particularly in private facilities. Issues related to professionalism, fairness, medical records, quality of care, patient satisfaction, medical teaching, and malpractice are discussed from the perspective of institutional development and improvement strategies. In summary, the medical director must be a servant to the institutional constitution and to his or her job description; when his or her function is fully implemented, he or she may represent a local health governor or master, ensuring supervision and improvement of the institutional healthcare system.

The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies

Successful collaboration in health care teams can be attributed to numerous elements, including processes at work in interpersonal relationships within the team (the interactional determinants), conditions within the organization (the organizational determinants), and the organization's environment (the systemic determinants). Through a review of the literature, this article presents a tabulated compilation of each of these determinant types as identified by empirical research and identifies the main characteristics of these determinants according to the conceptual work. We then present a "showcase" of recent Canadian policy initiatives--The Canadian Health Transition Fund (HTF)--to illustrate how the various categories of determinants can be mobilized. The literature review reveals that very little of the empirical work has dealt with determinants of interprofessional collaboration in health, particularly its organizational and systemic determinants. Furthermore, our overview of experience at the Canadian HTF suggests that a systemic approach should be adopted in evaluative research on the determinants of effective collaborative practice.