Patients' Experiences of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in Primary Care: A Scoping Review of the Literature.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Morgan KH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7786771 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Patients' Experiences of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in Primary Care: A Scoping Review of the Literature.
Morgan Katherine H KH Barroso Cristina Sofia CS Bateman Sarah S Dixson Melanie M Brown Kathleen Conroy KC
Journal of patient experience 20200527 6
Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) has been shown to improve patient safety and quality of care. Particularly, IPC assists health care providers to manage complex and chronic diseases. To this end, primary care centers around the world have begun practicing IPC; however, little is known about the patient's experience of IPC in primary care (IPC-pc). The goals of this scoping review were to identify the studies exploring patients' perspectives on IPC-pc and to reveal gaps in the literature for ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionTelehealth is a growing topic, with potential to improve access to primary healthcare. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding how telehealth could facilitate interprofessional collaboration that is recommended to strengthen the comprehensive approach of primary healthcare. The objective is to identify the characteristics and applications of telehealth services related to the interprofessional collaborative practice of primary healthcare professionals.Methods and analysisThis review will cover studies including as target population those health professionals who work in telehealth services; as concept, telehealth in relation to collaborative interprofessional practice; and as context, primary healthcare. A scoping review will be carried out according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Databases to be searched include MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Eric, Scopus, LILACS and Web of Science. All identified records will be grouped, duplicates will be removed, titles and abstracts will be selected by two independent reviewers, and the full text of selected articles will be evaluated in detail. A data extraction tool developed by the reviewers will be used for data extraction. The results will be presented in data map format in a logical way, in a diagram or in a tabular format, accompanied by a descriptive summary.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required for this study. A manuscript based on this scoping review will be submitted to a journal and we hope it will contribute to scientific knowledge on the interprofessional field and key research findings will be sent to key events on interprofessional practice and education.Systematic review registrationThis scoping review was registered in the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2BV8D).
| S-EPMC10030669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImproving the patient experience is one of the quadruple aims of healthcare. Therefore, understanding patient experiences and perceptions of healthcare interactions is paramount to quality improvement. This integrative review aimed to explore how patients with chronic conditions experience Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in primary care.MethodsAn integrative review was conducted to comprehensively synthesize primary studies that used qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. Databases searched were Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science on June 1st, 2021. Eligible studies were empirical full-text studies in primary care that reported experiences or perceptions of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice by adult patients with a chronic condition, in any language published in any year. Quality appraisal was conducted on included studies using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Data on patients' experiences and perceptions of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in primary care were extracted, and findings were thematically analyzed through a meta-synthesis.ResultsForty-eight (n = 48) studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of n = 3803 participants. Study quality of individual studies was limited by study design, incomplete reporting, and the potential for positive publication bias. Three themes and their sub-themes were developed inductively: (1) Interacting with Healthcare Teams, subthemes: widening the network, connecting with professionals, looking beyond the condition, and overcoming chronic condition collectively; (2) Valuing Convenient Healthcare, subthemes: sharing space and time, care planning creates structure, coordinating care, valuing the general practitioner role, and affording healthcare; (3) Engaging Self-care, subthemes: engaging passively is circumstantial, and, engaging actively and leading care.ConclusionsPatients overwhelmingly had positive experiences of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice, signaling it is appropriate for chronic condition management in primary care. The patient role in managing their chronic condition was closely linked to their experience. Future studies should investigate how the patient role impacts the experience of patients, carers, and health professionals in this context.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO: CRD42020156536.
| S-EPMC8759162 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChronic conditions can lead to physical, cognitive and social decline; thus, increasing an individual's dependence on family who assist with activities of daily living. Interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP), involving two or more health professionals working with the patient and their family, is one model of care for the high-quality management of individuals with chronic conditions in primary care. Nevertheless, family carers have reported a disconnect between themselves and healthcare providers in previous research. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of family carers for individuals with chronic conditions, regarding their involvement in IPCP.MethodsAspects of constructivist grounded theory methodology were used. Family carers of individuals with chronic conditions were invited to participate in a one-on-one, semistructured interview about their experiences with IPCP in the care of their loved one. Interview transcripts were analysed using Charmaz's four-step iterative process: (1) line-by-line coding, (2) focused coding, (3) categorisation of codes and (4) potential theme and subtheme development with memo writing to support each phase of analysis. The research team collaborated on reflexivity exercises, the conceptualisation of categories and the development of themes.ResultsConstructivist data analysis of interviews (average 40 min) with 10 family carers resulted in two themes. (1) Stepping in for my loved one represents the notion that carers take on external roles on behalf of their loved ones (subthemes: working with interprofessional teams, supporting independence and learning as I go). (2) Taking on the carer role, represents the internal factors that influence the external roles described in theme 1 (subthemes: feeling obligated to be involved and changing relationship dynamics).ConclusionThis study outlines the external actions and internal influences on family carer involvement in an interprofessional team. The required knowledge and support to care for their loved ones is currently learned in an ad hoc manner, and carers' resources should be better promoted by health professionals. Additionally, the relationship dynamics between a carer and their loved one change as the carer becomes more involved in IPCP and influences how and the extent health professionals involve family carers.Patient or public contributionCarers were the study population involved in this qualitative study. Patient advocates who have chronic conditions, and are informal family carers, were involved in the creation and design of this study, including a review of the research question, participant information sheet and the interview guide.
| S-EPMC10632645 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInterprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) offers great potential to improve healthcare. Increases in IPCP will require educating learners in authentic IPCP settings and will generate opportunities and challenges.MethodsIn January 2015, we implemented an IPCP model called Collaborative Care (CC) for hospitalized adult medical patients. We explored learner perspectives regarding their educational experiences. We deductively coded transcripts from semi-structured interviews with medical learners. Data related to educational experiences were thematically analyzed.ResultsTwenty-four of 28 (85.7%) medical learners rotating on CC from January to May 2015 completed interviews. Subsequent inductive analysis of these interviews identified four themes: Loss of Educational Opportunities during Rounds, Feelings of Uncertainty during New Situations, Strategies for Adaptation, and Improved Communication with Patients and the Team.ConclusionsIncreased implementation of IPCP will lead to a greater number of learners being exposed to authentic IPCP settings and will generate opportunities and challenges. Though learners perceived improved communication skills in an IPCP model, they also described loss of profession-specific learning opportunities and feelings of uncertainty. These findings corroborate the need for novel teaching methods aligned with IPCP clinical learning environments and educational assessment strategies that reflect attainment of both profession-specific and interprofessional competencies.
| S-EPMC7092524 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIf interprofessional collaborative practice is to be an important component of healthcare reform, then an evidentiary base connecting interprofessional education to interprofessional practice with significantly improved health and healthcare outcomes is an unconditional necessity. This study is a scoping review of the current peer reviewed literature linking interprofessional collaborative care and interprofessional collaborative practice to clearly identified healthcare and/or patient health-related outcomes. The research question for this review was: What does the evidence from the past decade reveal about the impact of Interprofessional collaborative practice on patient-related outcomes in the US healthcare system?Materials and methodsA modified preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach was followed.ResultsOf an initial 375 articles retrieved 20 met review criteria. The most common professions represented in the studies reviewed were physicians, pharmacists and nurses. Primary care was the most common care delivery setting and measures related to chronic disease the most commonly measured outcomes. No study identified negative impacts of interprofessional collaborative practice. Eight outcome categories emerged from a content analysis of the findings of the reviewed studies.ConclusionsThe results suggest a need for more research on the measurable impact of interprofessional collaborative practice and/or care on patient health-related outcomes to further document its benefits and to explore the models, systems and nature of collaborations that best improve population health, increase patient satisfaction, and reduce cost of care.
| S-EPMC6594675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis integrative review synthesises research studies that have investigated the perceptions of nurse practitioners and medical practitioners working in primary health care. The aggregation of evidence on barriers and facilitators to working collaboratively and experiences about the processes of collaboration is of value to understand success factors and factors that impede collaborative working relationships.MethodsAn integrative review, which used systematic review processes, was undertaken to summarise qualitative and quantitative studies published between 1990 and 2012. Databases searched were the Cochrane Library, the Joanna Briggs Institute Library, PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Informit and ProQuest. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for quality. Study findings were extracted relating to a) barriers and facilitators to collaborative working and b) views and experiences about the process of collaboration. The findings were narratively synthesised, supported by tabulation.Results27 studies conducted in seven different countries met the inclusion criteria. Content analysis identified a number of barriers and facilitators of collaboration between nurse practitioners and medical practitioners. By means of data comparison five themes were developed in relation to perceptions and understanding of collaboration. Nurse practitioners and medical practitioners have differing views on the essentials of collaboration and on supervision and autonomous nurse practitioner practice. Medical practitioners who have a working experience with NPs express more positive attitudes towards collaboration. Both professional groups report concerns and negative experiences with collaborative practice but also value certain advantages of collaboration.ConclusionsThe review shows that working in collaboration is a slow progression. Exposure to working together helps to overcome professional hurdles, dispel concerns and provide clarity around roles and the meaning of collaboration of NPs and MPs. Guidelines on liability and better funding strategies are necessary to facilitate collaborative practice whether barriers lie in individual behaviours or in broader policies.
| S-EPMC3846155 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interprofessional collaborative practice has been shown to be an appropriate model of care for chronic disease management in primary care. However, how patients play a role in this model is relatively unknown. The aim of this constructivist grounded theory focus group study was to explore the perceptions of patient advocates regarding the role of patients in interprofessional collaborative practice for chronic conditions in primary care. Primary data were collected from patient advocates, from public and private Australian organisations and who represent patients with chronic disease in primary care, through focus groups in July-August 2020. Videoconference focus groups were recorded, transcribed verbatim and inductively, thematically analysed using the five-step approach by Charmaz: (1) initial line-by-line coding, (2) focused coding, (3) memo writing, (4) categorisation and (5) theme and sub-theme development. Three focus groups comprising 17 patient advocates with diverse cultural and professional backgrounds participated. Two themes and five sub-themes relating to interprofessional collaborative practice teams were constructed from the data. In theme 1, patients 'shifted across the spectrum of roles' from 'relinquishing control to the team', 'joining the team' to 'disengaging from the team'. The second theme was the need for 'juggling roles' by 'integrating patient role with life roles', and 'learning about the patient role'. The diversity and variability of patient roles as described by patient advocates highlight the challenges of working with people with chronic conditions. The diverse patient roles described by advocates are an important finding that may better inform communication between patients and health professionals when managing chronic conditions. From the health professional perspective, identification of the role of a patient may be challenging. Therefore, future research should explore the development of a tool to assist both patients and health professionals to identify patient roles as they move across the spectrum, with the support of policy makers. This tool should aim to identify and promote patient engagement in interprofessional collaborative practice in primary care settings.
| S-EPMC10087047 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Video consultation (VC) is an emerging consultation mode in general practice. The challenges and benefits of implementing it are not necessarily realised until it is in use, and being experienced by patients and clinicians. To date, there has been no review of the evidence about how patients and clinicians experience VC in general practice. AIM:The study aimed to explore both patients' and clinicians' experiences of VCs in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING:A systematic scoping review was carried out of empirical studies. METHOD:All major databases were searched for empirical studies of any design, published from 1 January 2010 to 11 October 2018 in the English language. Studies were included where synchronous VCs occurred between a patient and a clinician in a primary care setting. Outcomes of interest related to experience of use. The quality of included studies were assessed. Findings were analysed using narrative synthesis. RESULTS:Seven studies were included in the review. Patients reported being satisfied with VC, describing reduced waiting times and travel costs as a benefit. For patients and clinicians, VC was not deemed appropriate for all presentations and all situations, and a face-to-face consultation was seen as preferable where this was possible. CONCLUSION:The findings of this scoping review show that primary care patients and clinicians report both positive and negative experiences when using VCs, and these experiences are, to a certain extent, context dependent. VC is potentially more convenient for patients, but is not considered superior to a face-to-face consultation. Accounts of experience are useful in the planning and implementation of any VC service.
| S-EPMC7330183 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Spiritual care is recognised as an essential element of the care of patients with serious illness such as cancer. Spiritual distress can result in poorer health outcomes including quality of life. The American Society of Clinical Oncology and other organisations recommend addressing spiritual needs in the clinical setting. This paper reviews the literature findings and proposes recommendations for interprofessional spiritual care.
| S-EPMC6435249 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Research on caregivers, defined as designated family members or support persons, in the medical intensive care unit (MICU) has primarily focused on their emotional needs and experiences, thus leaving a gap in knowledge related to their perceptions of team dynamics. OBJECTIVE:To examine caregivers' perceptions of team interactions and competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) and overall satisfaction with the MICU team. METHODS:The Support Person Jefferson Teamwork Observation Guide (JTOG)™ was administered to a convenience sample of caregivers in the MICU at a large urban academic medical center between May 2016 and December 2016. RESULTS:One hundred sixty-one JTOG surveys were completed. Caregivers agreed on the importance of healthcare professionals working together as a team to provide patient care (3.97 out of 4.0 on Likert response scale where 1 is "Not at all important" and 4 is 'Extremely important") and were satisfied with the MICU team (3.74 out of 4.0), positively evaluating the four core competencies for IPCP (3.55 for values/ethics, 3.58 for interprofessional communication, 3.61 for roles/responsibilities, and 3.64 for teams/teamwork) and the patient/family-centeredness sub-competency (3.58 out of 4.0). There was a strong positive correlation between caregivers' Global JTOG scores and overall satisfaction with the MICU team (r?=?0.596, p?<?0.01). Caregivers' comments about factors that affected their experience focused on aspects of interprofessional communication and patient/family-centeredness. CONCLUSION:Findings underscore the importance of interprofessional communication and providing patient/family-centered care. Assessing caregivers' perceptions of IPCP can provide a critical lens into team functioning and, thus, be used to identify teams' strengths as well as opportunities for improvement.
| S-EPMC6153212 | biostudies-literature