Dataset Information

Better together? a naturalistic qualitative study of inter-professional working in collaborative care for co-morbid depression and physical health problems.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mental-physical multi-morbidities pose challenges for primary care services that traditionally focus on single diseases. Collaborative care models encourage inter-professional working to deliver better care for patients with multiple chronic conditions, such as depression and long-term physical health problems. Successive trials from the United States have shown that collaborative care effectively improves depression outcomes, even in people with long-term conditions (LTCs), but little is known about how to implement collaborative care in the United Kingdom. The aim of the study was to explore the extent to which collaborative care was implemented in a naturalistic National Health Service setting.

Methods

A naturalistic pilot study of collaborative care was undertaken in North West England. Primary care mental health professionals from IAPT (Increasing Access to Psychological Therapies) services and general practice nurses were trained to collaboratively identify and manage patients with co-morbid depression and long-term conditions. Qualitative interviews were performed with health professionals at the beginning and end of the pilot phase. Normalization Process Theory guided analysis.

Results

Health professionals adopted limited elements of the collaborative care model in practice. Although benefits of co-location in primary care practices were reported, including reduced stigma of accessing mental health treatment and greater ease of disposal for identified patients, existing norms around the division of mental and physical health work in primary care were maintained, limiting integration of the mental health practitioners into the practice setting. Neither the mental health practitioners nor the practice nurses perceived benefits to joint management of patients.

Conclusions

Established divisions between mental and physical health may pose particular challenges for multi-morbidity service delivery models such as collaborative care. Future work should explore patient perspectives about whether greater inter-professional working enhances experiences of care. The study demonstrates that research into implementation of novel treatments must consider how the introduction of innovation can be balanced with the need for integration into existing practice.

SUBMITTER: Knowles SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3848572 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Better together? a naturalistic qualitative study of inter-professional working in collaborative care for co-morbid depression and physical health problems.

Knowles Sarah E SE Chew-Graham Carolyn C Coupe Nia N Adeyemi Isabel I Keyworth Chris C Thampy Harish H Coventry Peter A PA

Implementation science : IS 20130920

<h4>Background</h4>Mental-physical multi-morbidities pose challenges for primary care services that traditionally focus on single diseases. Collaborative care models encourage inter-professional working to deliver better care for patients with multiple chronic conditions, such as depression and long-term physical health problems. Successive trials from the United States have shown that collaborative care effectively improves depression outcomes, even in people with long-term conditions (LTCs), b ...[more]

PMID: 24053257

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: The National Integrated Care Programme for Older People (NICPOP), formerly NCPOP aims to support older people to live well in their homes by developing primary and secondary care services for older people, especially those with complex needs. The programme develops integrated intermediate care which traverses both hospital and community settings through multidisciplinary and interagency teams. This team-based approach to the integration of health services is a novel innovation in Irish health service delivery and will require, over time, a shift in cultures of care to allow for the development of competencies for inter-professional collaboration across the care continuum. The ECLECTIC project will develop an implementation framework for achieving, maintaining and monitoring competencies for interprofessional collaboration among multi-disciplinary teams charged with delivering care for older people across the continuum from acute to community settings. Design: The ECLECTIC research design has been developed in collaboration with the NICPOP. In phase one of the project, a co-design team will collaborate to define and shape competencies for interprofessional collaboration. Phase two will involve the delivery of a collective leadership intervention over a 10-month period with multidisciplinary professionals working with older people across two geographical regions (Mullingar/Midlands and Beaumont/Dublin North). Each group will comprise of members of two multidisciplinary teams charged with coordinating and delivering care to older people across the continuum of acute to community care. Observations of collaborative inter-professional working will take place before, during, and after intervention. In phase three of the study, analysis of the interview and observation data will be presented to the co-design team in order to develop an implementation framework for future teams. Discussion: The co-design process will develop core competencies and performance indicators for collaborative interprofessional working. The resulting implementation framework will be implemented nationally as part of the NICPOP.

Project description:BackgroundWorking effectively with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is important for maximising the effectiveness of a health care interaction between and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients and a health professional. This paper presents a framework to guide health professional practice in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health.MethodsThis qualitative study was based in a social constructionist epistemology and was guided by a critical social research methodology. Two methods were employed: interviews with Aboriginal health workers and allied health professionals about their experiences of working together in Aboriginal health, and an auto-ethnography conducted by the researcher, a non-Aboriginal dietitian and researcher who worked closely with two Aboriginal communities while undertaking this research.ResultsInterviews were conducted with 44 allied health professionals and Aboriginal health workers in 2010. Critical Social research, which involves the deconstruction and reconstruction of data, was used to analyse data and guided the evolution of themes. Strategies that were identified as important to guide practice when working respectfully in Aboriginal health included: Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people working with Aboriginal health workers, using appropriate processes, demonstrating commitment to building relationships, relinquishing control, having an awareness of Aboriginal history, communication, commitment, flexibility, humility, honesty, and persistence. Reciprocity and reflection/reflexivity were found to be cornerstone strategies from which many other strategies naturally followed. Strategies were grouped into three categories: approach, skills and personal attributes which led to development of the Framework.ConclusionsThe approach, skills and personal attributes of health professionals are important when working in Aboriginal health. The strategies identified in each category provide a Framework for all health professionals to use when working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Project description:Background: Inter-professional and interpersonal relationships in collaborative work environments can prove to be critical elements in healthcare practice. When implementers fail to understand the importance of a collaborative perspective, this can lead to communication problems which ultimately harm the users. Objectives: To improve the inter-professional collaborative work skills of Mexican students in their first year of medical and nursing degrees through the use of a training program geared toward development of interpersonal skills and interdisciplinary work. Methods: The sample was composed of 162 students (62 males and 99 females) from the School of Healthcare Sciences of the Autonomous University of Coahuila, Mexico. The main measures used were the Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE); the Jefferson Scale of Attitudes toward Inter-Professional Collaborative Work between Medical and Nursing Professionals (JSAPNC); and the Jefferson Scale of Lifelong Learning (JeffSPLL). The entire sample was divided into two groups (experimental and control groups). Both groups attended an extra-curricular program using a coaching methodology. In the first case the topic focused on attitudes toward inter-professional collaborative work. In the second case, the program focused on addiction. Both programs ran for 4 months. Psychometric instruments were applied at the beginning and at the end of both programs. After analyzing the reliability of the instruments, an ANOVA test was performed. Results: The control group of medical students showed a deterioration in the development of collaborative work skills (p < 0.01), whereas in the experimental group this deterioration was not present. In the experimental group of nursing students, a significant increase in the development of collaborative work skills (p < 0.05) was observed. The differences were clearly due to the professional area of study (p < 0.001). Conclusion: There are differences in collaborative work skill development among different professional areas. These differences can be reduced through the implementation of a program aimed at developing collaborative work and interpersonal skills in the early stages of training.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Inter-professional education (IPE) builds inter-professional collaboration (IPC) attitude/skills of health professionals. This interventional IPE programme evaluates whether benchmarking sharing can successfully cultivate seed instructors responsible for improving their team members' IPC attitudes. DESIGN:Prospective, pre-post comparative cross-sectional pilot study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS:Thirty four physicians, 30 nurses and 24 pharmacists, who volunteered to be trained as seed instructors participated in 3.5-hour preparation and 3.5-hour simulation courses. Then, participants (n=88) drew lots to decide 44 presenters, half of each profession, who needed to prepare IPC benchmarking and formed Group 1. The remaining participants formed Group 2 (regular). Facilitators rated the Group 1 participants' degree of appropriate transfer and sustainable practice of the learnt IPC skills in the workplace according to successful IPC examples in their benchmarking sharing. RESULTS:For the three professions, improvement in IPC attitude was identified by sequential increase in the post-course (second month, T2) and end-of-study (third month, T3) Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS) and Attitudes Towards Healthcare Teams Scale (ATHCTS) scores, compared with pre-course (first month, T1) scores. By IEPS and ATHCTS-based assessment, the degree of sequential improvements in IPC attitude was found to be higher among nurses and pharmacists than in physicians. In benchmarking sharing, the facilitators' agreement about the degree of participants'appropriate transfer and sustainable practice learnt 'communication and teamwork' skills in the workplace were significantly higher among pharmacists and nurses than among physicians. The post-intervention random sampling survey (sixth month, Tpost) found that the IPC attitude of the three professions improved after on-site IPC skill promotion by new programme-trained seed instructors within teams. CONCLUSIONS:Addition of benchmark sharing to a diamond-based IPE simulation programme enhances participants' IPC attitudes, self-reflection, workplace transfer and practice of the learnt skills. Furthermore, IPC promotion within teams by newly trained seed instructors improved the IPC attitudes across all three professions.

Dataset Information

Better together? a naturalistic qualitative study of inter-professional working in collaborative care for co-morbid depression and physical health problems.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Better together? a naturalistic qualitative study of inter-professional working in collaborative care for co-morbid depression and physical health problems.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets