Lateral epicondylalgia. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of interdisciplinary cooperation and treatment choice in the Swedish health care system

Inter-professional agreement and collaboration between extended scope physiotherapists and orthopaedic surgeons in an orthopaedic outpatient shoulder clinic - a mixed methods study

Background

Extended scope physiotherapists (ESP) are increasingly supplementing orthopaedic surgeons (OS) in diagnosing patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Studies have reported satisfactory diagnostic and treatment agreement between ESPs and OSs, but methodological study quality is generally low, and only few studies have evaluated inter-professional collaboration. Our aims were: 1) to evaluate agreement on diagnosis and treatment plan between ESPs and OSs examining patients with shoulder disorders, 2) to explore and evaluate their inter-professional collaboration.

Methods

In an orthopaedic outpatient shoulder clinic, 69 patients were examined independently twice on the same day by an ESP and an OS in random order. Primary and secondary diagnoses (nine categories) and treatment plan (five categories, combinations allowed) were registered by each professional and compared. Percentage of agreement and kappa-values were calculated.

Two semi-structured focus-group interviews were performed with ESPs and OSs, respectively. Interviews were based on the theoretical concept of Relational Coordination, encompassing seven dimensions of communication and relationship among professionals. A thematic analysis was conducted.

Results

Agreement on primary diagnosis was 62% (95% CI: [50; 73]). ESPs and OSs agreed on the combination of diagnoses in 79% (95% CI: [70; 89]) of the cases. Partial diagnostic agreement (one professional’s primary diagnosis was also registered as either primary or secondary diagnosis by the other) was 96% (95% CI: [91; 100]). Across treatment categories, agreement varied between 68% (95% CI: [57; 79]) and 100%. In 43% (95% CI: [31; 54]) of the cases, ESP and OS had full concordance between treatment categories chosen, while they agreed on at least one recommendation in 96% (95% CI: [91; 100]).

Positive statements of all dimensions of relational coordination were found. Three themes especially important in the inter-professional collaboration emerged: Close communication, equal and respectful relationship and professional skills.

Conclusions

In the majority of cases, the ESP and OS registered the same or partly the same diagnosis and treatment plan. Indications of a high relational coordination implying a good inter-professional collaboration were found. Our results support that ESPs and OSs can share the task of examining selected patients with shoulder disorders in an orthopaedic clinic.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03343951. Registered 10 November 2017

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-020-03831-z.

Instruments measuring interprofessional collaboration in healthcare - a scoping review

Worldwide there is growing understanding of the importance of interprofessional collaboration in providing well-functioning healthcare. However, little is known about how interprofessional collaboration can be measured between different health-care professionals. In this review, we aim to fill this gap, by identifying and analyzing the existing instruments measuring interprofessional collaboration in healthcare. A scoping review design was applied. A systematic literature search of two electronic databases, Medline (PubMed) and CINAHL, was conducted in 03/2018. The search yielded 1020 studies, of which 35 were selected for the review. The data were analyzed by content analysis. In total, 29 instruments measuring interprofessional collaboration were found. Interprofessional collaboration was measured predominantly between nurses and physicians with different instruments in various health-care settings. Psychometric testing was unsystematic, focusing predominantly on construct and content validity and internal consistency, thus further validation studies with comprehensive testing are suggested. The results of this review can be used to select instruments measuring interprofessional collaboration in practice or research. Future research is needed to strengthen the evidence of reliability and validity of these instruments.

A systematic review of mixed methods research on human factors and ergonomics in health care

This systematic literature review provides information on the use of mixed methods research in human factors and ergonomics (HFE) research in health care. Using the PRISMA methodology, we searched four databases (PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and Engineering Village) for studies that met the following inclusion criteria: (1) field study in health care, (2) mixing of qualitative and quantitative data, (3) HFE issues, and (4) empirical evidence. Using an iterative and collaborative process supported by a structured data collection form, the six authors identified a total of 58 studies that primarily address HFE issues in health information technology (e.g., usability) and in the work of healthcare workers. About two-thirds of the mixed methods studies used the convergent parallel study design where quantitative and qualitative data were collected simultaneously. A variety of methods were used for collecting data, including interview, survey and observation. The most frequent combination involved interview for qualitative data and survey for quantitative data. The use of mixed methods in healthcare HFE research has increased over time. However, increasing attention should be paid to the formal literature on mixed methods research to enhance the depth and breadth of this research.