Dataset Information

Measuring the performance of interprofessional primary health care teams: understanding the teams perspective.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

The aim of the study was to describe practices that support collaboration in interprofessional primary health care teams, and identify performance indicators perceived to measure the impact of this collaboration from the perspective of interprofessional health providers.

Background

Despite the surge of interprofessional primary health care models implemented across Canada, there is little evidence as to whether or not the intended outcomes of primary health care teams have been achieved. Part of the challenge is determining the most appropriate measures that can demonstrate the value of collaborative care. To date, little remains known about performance measurement from the providers contributing to the collaborative care process in interprofessional primary care teams. Having providers from a range of disciplinary backgrounds assist in the development of performance measures can help identify measures most relevant to demonstrate the value of collaborative care on the intended outcomes of interprofessional primary care models.

Methods

A qualitative study; part of a larger mixed methods developmental evaluation to examine performance measurement in interprofessional primary health care teams. A stakeholder workshop was conducted at an annual association meeting of interprofessional primary health care teams in the province of Ontario, Canada. Six questions guided the workshop groups and participant responses were documented on worksheets and flip charts. All responses were collected and entered verbatim into a word document. Qualitative analytic strategies were applied to each question.

Findings

A total of 283 primary health care providers from 14 health professions working in interprofessional primary health care teams participated. Top three elements of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 628) were communication (n = 146), co-treatment (n = 112) and patient-based conferences (n = 81). Top three performance indicators currently used to demonstrate the value of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 241) were patient experience (n = 71), patient health status (n = 35) and within team referrals (n = 30).

SUBMITTER: Donnelly C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6719251 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring the performance of interprofessional primary health care teams: understanding the teams perspective.

Donnelly Catherine C Ashcroft Rachelle R Mofina Amanda A Bobbette Nicole N Mulder Carol C

Primary health care research & development 20190828

<h4>Aim</h4>The aim of the study was to describe practices that support collaboration in interprofessional primary health care teams, and identify performance indicators perceived to measure the impact of this collaboration from the perspective of interprofessional health providers.<h4>Background</h4>Despite the surge of interprofessional primary health care models implemented across Canada, there is little evidence as to whether or not the intended outcomes of primary health care teams have bee ...[more]

PMID: 31455458

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNursing care quality varies between hospitals, and even between departments within the same institution. Suboptimal care can have deleterious consequences for patients such as lengthened hospital stay, nosocomial infection, pressure ulcers or death. Experts recommend the implementation of nursing performance improvement systems to assess team performance and monitor patient outcomes and efficiency savings. In practice, these systems are expected to include feedback processes directed towards nursing teams and interprofessional staff in order to facilitate adjustments and improve their performance. Unfortunately, feedback appears somewhat haphazard and, at times, overlooked. This could be explained by an ongoing absence of clear recommendations. As a result, feedback effects are inconclusive: some teams improve their practice, others do not. Although feedback has been conceptualised and studied from different theoretical perspectives, ongoing empirical inconsistencies remain unexplained. The goal of this rapid realist review protocol is to develop a theory that explains how feedback shared with interprofessional health care teams shape nursing performance improvement systems.MethodThis study follows standard guidelines established for realist reviews. Mechanisms at work will be analysed using Actor-Network Theory. All scientific documents are selected from five databases, are published in both English and French between 2010 and 2018, and include empirical research, reviews and grey literature. First, selection of documents will proceed on the basis of titles and abstracts; followed by a second selection by reading the remaining full texts. Inclusion criteria and a data extraction form will be pilot tested with 40 articles prior to completion by two reviewers. Data will be summarised in the form of [context, mechanism, outcome] equations to theorise operational feedback.DiscussionThe innovative combination of Actor-Network Theory with a realist methodology holds promise for the identification of explanatory equations in complex systems and theory development. A rapid realist review is relevant to address an enduring knowledge gap which requires theory development. This preliminary study lays the groundwork for a pioneering theory on feedback in nursing performance improvement systems that will subsequently inform a multiple case study.Systematic review registrationProspero CRD42018110128.

Project description:BACKGROUND:With the 40th anniversary of the Declaration of Alma-Ata, a global effort is underway to re-focus on strengthening primary health care systems, with emphasis on leveraging community health workers (CHWs) towards the goal of achieving universal health coverage for all. Institutionalizing effective, sustainable community health systems is currently limited by a lack of standard metrics for measuring CHW performance and the systems they work within. Developed through iterative consultations, supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and in partnership with USAID and UNICEF, this paper details a framework, list of indicators, and measurement considerations for monitoring CHW performance in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS:A review of peer-reviewed articles, reports, and global data collection tools was conducted to identify key measurement domains in monitoring CHW performance. Three consultations were successively convened with global stakeholders, community health implementers, advocates, measurement experts, and Ministry of Health representatives using a modified Delphi approach to build consensus on priority indicators. During this process, a structured, web-based survey was administered to identify the importance and value of specific measurement domains, sub-domains, and indicators determined through the literature reviews and initial stakeholder consultations. Indicators with more than 75% support from participants were further refined with expert qualitative input. RESULTS:Twenty-one sub-domains for measurement were identified including measurement of incentives for CHWs, supervision and performance appraisal, data use, data reporting, service delivery, quality of services, CHW absenteeism and attrition, community use of services, experience of services, referral/counter-referral, credibility/trust, and programmatic costs. Forty-six indicators were agreed upon to measure the sub-domains. In the absence of complete population enumeration and digitized health information systems, the quality of metrics to monitor CHW programs is limited. CONCLUSIONS:Better data collection approaches at the community level are needed to strengthen management of CHW programs and community health systems. The proposed list of metrics balances exhaustive and pragmatic measurement of CHW performance within primary healthcare systems. Adoption of the proposed framework and associated indicators by CHW program implementors may improve programmatic effectiveness, strengthen their accountability to national community health systems, drive programmatic quality improvement, and plausibly improve the impact of these programs.

Project description:The rapid increase of acute and intensive care capacities in hospitals needed during the response to COVID-19 created an urgent demand for skilled healthcare staff across the globe. To upscale capacity, many hospitals chose to increase their teams in these departments with rapidly re-deployed inter-professional healthcare personnel, many of whom had no prior experience of working in a high-risk environment and were neither prepared nor trained for work on such wards. This systematic review of reviews examines the current evidence base for successful teamwork in rapidly deployed interprofessional teams in intensive and acute care settings, by assessing systematic reviews of empirical studies to inform future deployments and support of rapidly formed clinical teams. This study identified 18 systematic reviews for further analysis. Utilising an integrative narrative synthesis process supported by thematic coding and graphical network analysis, 13 themes were found to dominate the literature on teams and teamwork in inter-professional and inter-disciplinary teams. This approach was chosen to make the selection process more transparent and enable the thematic clusters in the reviewed papers to be presented visually and codifying four factors that structure the literature on inter-professional teams (i.e., team-internal procedures and dynamics, communicative processes, organisational and team extrinsic influences on teams, and lastly patient and staff outcomes). Practically, the findings suggest that managers and team leaders in fluid and ad-hoc inter-professional healthcare teams in an intensive care environment need to pay attention to reducing pre-existing occupational identities and power-dynamics by emphasizing skill mix, establishing combined workspaces and break areas, clarifying roles and responsibilities, facilitating formal information exchange and developing informal opportunities for communication. The results may guide the further analysis of factors that affect the performance of inter-professional teams in emergency and crisis deployment.

Project description:BackgroundAcross healthcare systems, current health policies promote interprofessional teamwork. Compared to single-profession general practitioner care, interprofessional primary healthcare teams are expected to possess added capacity to care for an increasingly complex patient population. This study aims to explore patients' experiences when their usual primary healthcare encounter with general practice shifts from single-profession general practitioner care to interprofessional team-based care.MethodsQualitative and quantitative data were collected through interviews and a survey among Norwegian patients. The interviews included ten patients (five women and five men) aged between 28 and 89, and four next of kin (all women). The qualitative analysis was carried out using thematic analysis and a continuity framework. The survey included 287 respondents, comprising 58 per cent female and 42 per cent male participants, aged 18 years and above. The respondents exhibited multiple diagnoses and often a lengthy history of illness. All participants experienced the transition to interprofessional teamwork at their general practitioner surgery as part of a primary healthcare team pilot.ResultsThe interviewees described team-based care as more fitting and better coordinated, including more time and more learning than with single-profession general practitioner care. Most survey respondents experienced improvements in understanding and mastering their health problems. Multi-morbid elderly interviewees and interviewees with mental illness shared experiences of improved information continuity. They found that important concerns they had raised with the nurse were known to the general practitioner and vice versa. None of the interviewees expressed dissatisfaction with the inclusion of a nurse in their general practitioner relationship. Several interviewees noted improved access to care. The nurse was seen as a strengthening link to the general practitioner. The survey respondents expressed strong agreement with being followed up by a nurse. The interviewees trusted that it was their general practitioner who controlled what happened to them in the general practitioner surgery.ConclusionFrom the patients' perspective, interprofessional teamwork in general practice can strengthen management, informational, and relational continuity. However, a prerequisite seems to be a clear general practitioner presence in the team.

Project description:BackgroundMost health care for people with diabetes occurs in family practice, yet balancing the time and resources to help these patients can be difficult. An intervention empowering patients, leveraging community resources, and assisting self-management could benefit patients and providers. Thus, the feasibility and potential for effectiveness of "Health Teams Advancing Patient Experience, Strengthening Quality through Health Connectors for Diabetes Management" (Health TAPESTRY-HC-DM) as an approach supporting diabetes self-management was explored to inform development of a future large-scale trial.MethodsFour-month pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), sequential explanatory qualitative component. Participants-patients of an interprofessional primary care team-were over age 18 years, diagnosed with diabetes and hypertension, and had Internet access and one of the following: uncontrolled HbA1c, recent diabetes diagnosis, end-stage/secondary organ damage, or provider referral. The Health TAPESTRY-HC-DM intervention focused on patient health goals/needs, integrating community volunteers, eHealth technologies, interprofessional primary care teams, and system navigation. Pilot outcomes included process measures (recruitment, retention, program participation), perceived program feasibility, benefits and areas for improvement, and risks or safety issues. The primary trial outcome was self-efficacy for managing diabetes. There were a number of secondary trial outcomes.ResultsOf 425 eligible patients invited, 50 signed consent (11.8%) and 35 completed the program (15 intervention, 20 control). Volunteers (n = 20) met 28 clients in 234 client encounters (home visits, phone calls, electronic messages); 27 reports were sent to the interprofessional team. At 4 months, controlling for baseline, most outcomes were better in the intervention compared to control group; physical activity notably better. The most common goal domains set were physical activity, diet/nutrition, and social connection. Clients felt the biggest impact was motivation toward goal achievement. They struggled with some of the technologies. Several participants perceived that the program was not a good fit, mostly those that felt they were already well-managing their diabetes.ConclusionsHealth TAPESTRY-HC-DM was feasible; a large-scale randomized controlled trial seems possible. However, further attention needs to be paid to improving recruitment and retention. The intervention was well received, though was a better fit for some participants than others.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02715791. Registered 22 March 2016-retrospectively registered.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Many countries are engaged in primary care reforms to support older adults who are living longer in the community. Health Teams Advancing Patient Experience: Strengthening Quality [Health TAPESTRY] is a primary care intervention aimed at supporting older adults that involves trained volunteers, interprofessional teams, technology, and system navigation. This paper examines implementation of Health TAPESTRY in relation to interprofessional teamwork including volunteers. METHODS:This study applied Normalization Process Theory (NPT) and used a descriptive qualitative approach [1] embedded in a mixed-methods, pragmatic randomized controlled trial. It was situated in two primary care practice sites in a large urban setting in Ontario, Canada. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with primary care providers, clinical managers, administrative assistants, volunteers, and a volunteer coordinator. Data was collected at 4?months (June-July 2015) and 12?months (February-March 2016) after intervention start-up. Patients were interviewed at the end of the six-month intervention. Field notes were taken at weekly huddle meetings. RESULTS:Overall, 84 participants were included in 17 focus groups and 13 interviews; 24 field notes were collected. Themes were organized under four NPT constructs of implementation: 1) Coherence- (making sense/understanding of the program's purpose/value) generating comprehensive assessments of older adults; strengthening health promotion, disease prevention, and self-management; enhancing patient-focused care; strengthening interprofessional care delivery; improving coordination of health and community services. 2) Cognitive Participation- (enrolment/buy-in) tackling new ways of working; attaining role clarity. 3) Collective Action- (enactment/operationalizing) changing team processes; reconfiguring resources. 4) Reflective Monitoring- (appraisal) improving teamwork and collaboration; reconfiguring roles and processes. CONCLUSIONS:This study contributes key strategies for effective implementation of interventions involving interprofessional primary care teams. Findings indicate that regular communication among all team members, the development of procedures and/or protocols to support team processes, and ongoing review and feedback are critical to implementation of innovations involving primary care teams. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02283723 November 5, 2014. Prospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Measuring the performance of interprofessional primary health care teams: understanding the teams perspective.

Aim

Background

Methods

Findings

Publications

Measuring the performance of interprofessional primary health care teams: understanding the teams perspective.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets