Implementation of an electronic health records system within an interprofessional model of care

Abstract

Implementation of electronic health records (EHR) systems is challenging even in traditional healthcare settings, where administrative and clinical roles and responsibilities are clearly defined. However, even in these traditional settings the conflicting needs of stakeholders can trigger hierarchical decision-making processes that reflect the traditional power structures in healthcare today. These traditional processes are not structured to allow for incorporation of new patient-care models such as patient-centered care and interprofessional teams. New processes for EHR implementation and evaluation will be required as healthcare shifts to a patient-centered model that includes patients, families, multiple agencies, and interprofessional teams in short- and long-term clinical decision-making. This new model will be enabled by healthcare information technology and defined by information flow, workflow, and communication needs. We describe a model in development for the configuration and implementation of an EHR system in an interprofessional, interagency, free-clinic setting. The model uses a formative evaluation process that is rooted in usability to configure the EHR to fully support the needs of the variety of providers working as an interprofessional team. For this model to succeed, it must include informaticists as equal and essential members of the healthcare team.     

Development and pilot testing of the collaborative practice assessment tool

Collaborative practice is receiving increased attention as a model of healthcare delivery that positively influences the effectiveness and efficiency of patient care while improving the work environment of healthcare providers. The collaborative practice assessment tool (CPAT) was developed from the literature to enable interprofessional teams to assess their collaborative practice. The CPAT survey included 56 items across nine domains including: mission and goals; relationships; leadership; role responsibilities and autonomy; communication; decision-making and conflict management; community linkages and coordination; perceived effectiveness and patient involvement; in addition to three open-ended questions. The tool was developed for use in a variety of settings involving a diversity of healthcare providers with the aim of helping teams to identify professional development needs and corresponding educational interventions. The results of two pilot tests indicated that the CPAT is a valid and reliable tool for assessing levels of collaborative practice within teams. This article describes the development of the tool, the pilot testing and validation process, as well as limitations of the tool.     

Development and pilot testing of the collaborative practice assessment tool

Collaborative practice is receiving increased attention as a model of healthcare delivery that positively influences the effectiveness and efficiency of patient care while improving the work environment of healthcare providers. The collaborative practice assessment tool (CPAT) was developed from the literature to enable interprofessional teams to assess their collaborative practice. The CPAT survey included 56 items across nine domains including: mission and goals; relationships; leadership; role responsibilities and autonomy; communication; decision-making and conflict management; community linkages and coordination; perceived effectiveness and patient involvement; in addition to three open-ended questions. The tool was developed for use in a variety of settings involving a diversity of healthcare providers with the aim of helping teams to identify professional development needs and corresponding educational interventions. The results of two pilot tests indicated that the CPAT is a valid and reliable tool for assessing levels of collaborative practice within teams. This article describes the development of the tool, the pilot testing and validation process, as well as limitations of the tool.     

Relational coordination in inter-organizational settings. How does lack of proximity affect coordination between hospital-based and community-based healthcare providers?

ABSTRACT

Coordination among healthcare providers in intra- and inter-organizational networks is critical for the provision of seamless and efficient healthcare. Relational Coordination (RC) represents a type of coordination that enables network participants to manage interdependencies and has consistently been found to improve quality and efficiency of patient care. The majority of RC studies focuses on intra-organizational settings, while less is known about inter-organizational settings. This pilot study examined RC in relation to a collaboration between a hospital-based geriatric team and a community-based acute care team. The study focused especially on how structural challenges due to lack of technological, geographical and organizational proximity between the healthcare providers affected RC, drawing on literature on inter-organizational collaboration. We adopted a qualitative case design to gain an in-depth understanding of barriers and facilitators of interprofessional RC. Data included seven qualitative interviews with healthcare professionals and managers across the two provider teams and 16 hours of participant observations. Findings suggested that core tasks were coordinated through strong RC, while RC in non-core tasks were systematically hindered by structural challenges of the inter-organizational setting. Findings also indicated that RC in core tasks was partly dependent on formal coordination mechanisms to overcome frictions in inter-organizational structures.     

Individual versus interprofessional team performance in formulating care transition plans: A randomised study of trainees from five professional groups

Health professions trainees’ performance in teams is rarely evaluated, but increasingly important as the healthcare delivery systems in which they will practice move towards team-based care. Effective management of care transitions is an important aspect of interprofessional teamwork. This mixed-methods study used a crossover design to randomise health professions trainees to work as individuals and as teams to formulate written care transition plans. Experienced external raters assessed the quality of the written care transition plans as well as both the quality of team process and overall team performance. Written care transition plan quality did not vary between individuals and teams (21.8 vs. 24.4, respectively, p = 0.42). The quality of team process did not correlate with the quality of the team-generated written care transition plans (r = ?0.172, p = 0.659). However, there was a significant correlation between the quality of team process and overall team performance (r = 0.692, p = 0.039). Teams with highly engaged recorders, performing an internal team debrief, had higher-quality care transition plans. These results suggest that high-quality interprofessional care transition plans may require advance instruction as well as teamwork in finalising the plan.     

Interprofessional practice in different patient care settings: A qualitative exploration

Increasing interprofessional practice is seen as a path to improved quality, decreased cost, and enhanced patient experience. However, little is known about how context shapes interprofessional work and how interventions should be crafted to account for a specific setting of interprofessional practice. To better understand, how the work of interprofessional practice differs across patient care settings we sought to understand the social processes found in varying work contexts to better understand how care is provided. A case study design was used in this study to yield a picture of patient care across three different settings. Qualitative analysis of teams from three healthcare settings (rehabilitation, acute care, and code team) was conducted, through the use of ten in-depth semi-structured interviews. Interview data from each participant were analyzed via an inductive content analysis approach based upon theories of work and teams from organisational science, a framework for interprofessional practice, and competencies for interprofessional education. The work processes of interprofessional practice varied across settings. Information exchange was more physician-centric and decision-making was more physician dominant in the non-rehabilitation settings. Work was described as concurrent only for the code team. Goal setting varied by setting and interpersonal relationships were only mentioned as important in the rehabilitation setting. The differences observed across settings identify some insights into how context shapes the process of interprofessional collaboration and some research questions that need further study.     

An exploratory study of interprofessional collaboration in end-of-life decision-making beyond palliative care settings

As healthcare delivery becomes increasingly interprofessional, it is imperative to identify opportunities for effective collaboration and coordination of care. Drawing on a Canadian qualitative study that adopted a constant comparative method based on the grounded theory approach, we report how healthcare providers’ (HCPs) personal experiences and professional roles intersect with system factors in hindering or enhancing their ability to support patients and families in planning for end-of-life (EOL) care. We used a criterion-based sampling strategy and sought HCPs who had direct experience engaging patients and families in complex healthcare decisions on: (1) initiating, withholding, or withdrawing treatment; (2) care planning; and/or (3) discharge planning. Interviews sought to understand what HCPs perceived as individual, (inter)professional, and system factors that might hinder, promote, or enhance support for patients/families. We present four major intersecting themes from in-depth interviews with 28 HCPs across acute, long-term, and community care settings that represent three barriers and one facilitator: discomfort with death and dying, confusion about role responsibility, lack of coordinated care, and importance of interprofessional teamwork. Attending to system power hierarchy, we explore interprofessional strategies to support patients’ and families’ care experiences and promote team-based decision-making. We recommend an interprofessional team approach to facilitate EOL decision-making across care settings and before death becomes imminent. Increasing educational initiatives and developing tools that focus on interprofessional collaboration may help HCPs to understand each other’s roles and perspectives, so that they can work together to provide a more coherent and coordinated approach to EOL decision-making.     

“Acute caring” in the emergency department

The aim of this essay was to discuss the ways in which the dynamics of interprofessional communication and collaboration among healthcare providers ultimately affect patient quality of care in the acute setting. Interprofessionalism describes a care model whereby health providers use complementary skills, knowledge and competencies to provide quality care to a group of patients. These interactions are characterized by trust, respect and an understanding of each other's skill and knowledge. At its best, the interprofessional care model has made great strides in the amelioration of patient outcomes, including reduction in negative outcomes, decreased health access needs and increased patient satisfaction. However, challenges with regard to communication and implementation have translated to a steep learning curve for healthcare providers. As such, a new-found emphasis has been placed on interprofessional education for today's healthcare students with the goal of promoting a more efficient and collaborative philosophy for tomorrow's healthcare teams.     

Interprofessional immersion: Use of interprofessional education collaborative competencies in side-by-side training of family medicine,pharmacy, nursing,and counselling psychology trainees

While supported by the Affordable Care Act, in the United States, interprofessional training often takes place after healthcare providers graduate and are practicing in the field. This article describes the implementation and evaluation of an interprofessional training for graduate-level healthcare trainees. A group of interprofessional healthcare faculty provided a weeklong interprofessional immersion for doctoral-level healthcare trainees (n = 24) in Pharmacy, Counselling Psychology, Nursing, and Family Medicine residents. Healthcare faculty and staff from each profession worked side-by-side to provide integrated training utilising the Interprofessional Education Collaborative core competency domains. Trainees were placed into small teams with representatives from each profession; each team observed, learned, and practiced working within teams to provide quality patient care. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected to identify the effect of the training on trainees’ self-reported team skills, as well as the extent to which the trainees learned and utilised the competencies. The results suggest that after completing the training, trainees felt more confident in their ability to work within an interprofessional team and more likely to utilise a team-based approach in the future.     

Implementing a collaborative coaching intervention for professionals providing care to children and their families: An exploratory study

The growing complexity of healthcare requires family and interprofessional partnerships to deliver effective care. Interprofessional coaching can enhance family-centred practice and collaboration. The purpose of this study was to explore the acceptability and feasibility of collaborative coaching training to improve family centredness within acute paediatric rehabilitation. Using a participatory action design, service providers (SPs; n = 36) underwent a 6-month coaching programme involving coaching workshops, learning triads, and tailored sessions with a licensed coach. The feasibility and acceptability of coaching on SPs’ family interactions and care was explored. Measure of Processes of Care (MPOC) and MPOC-SP, a coaching skills questionnaire, and focus groups were used to evaluate the acceptability of coaching training. We found that structured coaching training was feasible and SPs reported significant improvements in their coaching skills; however, MPOC and MPOC-SP scores did not reveal significant differences. Qualitative themes indicated that clinicians are developing coaching competencies and applying these skills in clinical practice. Participants perceived that the coaching approach strengthened relationships amongst colleagues, and they valued the opportunity for interprofessional learning. Findings suggest that coaching offers promise as an approach to facilitate successful patient outcomes and improve processes of care. Preliminary findings indicate that interprofessional coaching training is acceptable, feasible, and can significantly improve SP coaching skills and improve team cohesion. Further research to study the effects of coaching on interprofessional care using validated outcome measures and to assess the impact on service delivery is recommended.     

Working together: Using a unique approach to evaluate an interactive and clinic-based longitudinal interprofessional education experience with 13 professions

Interprofessional education (IPE) involving an interactive and longitudinal clinic experience at an inner-city charitable clinic from September to May 2013/2014 was evaluated. Pre-, mid-, and post-intervention data were collected from students in 13 different professions including medicine (medical and physician assistant), dentistry (dental and dental hygiene), nursing (undergraduate and clinical nurse specialist), public health, pharmacy, physical therapy, occupational therapy, nutritional sciences, speech and language pathology, and social work. To evaluate their interprofessional attitudes, students completed the TeamSTEPPS Teamwork Attitudes Questionnaire (T-TAQ) and Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS). They also completed a unique measure, healthcare professionals circles diagrams (HPCDs), that indicated student conceptualisation of a healthcare team caring for a complex patient, along with perception of their team’s progress towards meeting patient goals. Results from the T-TAQ and RIPLS scores indicated small but significant increases from pre- to post-intervention (p = 0.005 and 0.012, respectively). Analysis of the HPCDs revealed significant increases in students’ perceptions of the types of interprofessional team members, relationships, and communication between professions to provide medical care to patients (p < 0.01). Most HPCDs included pharmacists, nurses, and physicians as part of the care team at all time points. Students significantly increased their inclusion of dentistry, public health, social work, and physician assistants as members of the healthcare team from pre- to post-intervention. Implications of our data indicated the importance of IPE interventions that include not only classroom-based sessions, but actual patient care experiences within interprofessional teams. It also reinforced the importance of new and unique methods to assess IPE.     

Preliminary investigation into sport and exercise psychology consultants’ views and experiences of an interprofessional care team approach to sport injury rehabilitation

Sport injury rehabilitation has moved from predominately physical treatment to a more holistic care. However, limited research has explored the views and experiences of those involved in such an approach. The purpose of this study was to preliminarily investigate sport psychology consultants’ (SPCs’) views and experiences of an interprofessional team approach to sport injury rehabilitation. A cross-sectional online survey previously used with athletic trainers was distributed via a US-based sport/exercise psychology list-serve (N = 1245). A total of 62 (27 men, 35 women, M age 38.2 years, age range: 22–73 years) participants with 10.6 (SD = 9.8) years of experience as an SPC were included in the final analyses. On average, SPCs felt that it was very important (M = 6.6; SD = 0.6) for athletes to have access to an interprofessional care team. Of the sample, 64.5% (n = 40) typically worked as part of an interprofessional care team 44.7% of the time. The SPCs (n = 28; 45.2%) also indicated that the primary treatment providers (e.g., athletic trainer, physical therapist) were typically serving as the primary point person for such teams. Since gaining entry to sport medicine can be an area SPCs struggle with, building effective working relationships with treatment providers can help promote and increase SPCs involvement in providing holistic, interprofessional care to athletes with injuries. To ensure athletes’ successful biopsychosocial return to sport, different individuals and professionals should work together for the benefit of the athlete by adopting holistic care during sports injury rehabilitation.     

Interprofessional education about patient decision support in specialty care

Specialty care involves services provided by health professionals who focus on treating diseases affecting one body system. In contrast to primary care – aimed at providing continuous, comprehensive care – specialty care often involves intermittent episodes of care focused around specific medical conditions. In addition, it typically includes multiple providers who have unique areas of expertise that are important in supporting patients’ care. Interprofessional care involves multiple professionals from different disciplines collaborating to provide an integrated approach to patient care. For patients to experience continuity of care across interprofessional providers, providers need to communicate and maintain a shared sense of responsibility to their patients. In this article, we describe challenges inherent in providing interprofessional patient decision support in specialty care. We propose ways for providers to engage in interprofessional decision support and discuss promising approaches to teaching an interprofessional decision support to specialty care providers. Additional evaluation and empirical research are required before further recommendations can be made about education for interprofessional decision support in specialty care.     

Perceived factors influencing hospital-based primary care clinic referrals to community health medical nutrition therapy: An exploratory study

Primary care clinics provide an array of diagnostic and clinical services that assist patients in preventing the onset or managing acute and chronic conditions. Some chronic conditions such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and type 2 diabetes require primary care professionals to seek additional medical intervention from registered dieticians. This study explored beliefs, attitudes, and practices of medical and administrative professionals in primary care clinics encountering patients who are potential candidates for ongoing nutrition education or counselling. Five focus groups with primary care providers and clinical staff (n = 24) were conducted to identify perceived intra-organisational factors influencing initiation of community health medical nutrition therapy (MNT) referrals. Lack of clarity regarding community health dieticians’ role in chronic disease management was the primary finding for the absence of MNT referrals. Insurance-imposed constraints, perceived patient readiness to change, and service inaccessibility were revealed as barriers that influence referrals to both community health and specialty care dieticians. This study underscores the importance of identifying organisational and interpersonal barriers that influence the initiation of community health MNT referrals. Understanding these barriers can create stronger interprofessional collaboration between primary care providers and community health dieticians.     

Examining perceptions from in situ simulation-based training on interprofessional collaboration during crisis event management in post-anesthesia care

Due to the potentially life-threatening conditions and risk of severe complications, post-anesthesia care units (PACU) require prompt team interventions. Miscommunication among professionals during crisis event management may directly affect patient safety. Therefore, developing strategies to enhance interprofessional collaboration (IPC) among critical care teams should be prioritized. In situ simulation (ISS) can be valuable in improving patient safety because it allows the practice of care team dynamics within a real clinical environment. However, its impact on IPC has yet to be demonstrated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of in situ simulation-based training on interprofessional collaboration and satisfaction toward co-workers during crisis event management in post-anesthesia care. A quasi-experimental study, pretest and post-test design with a paired control group was performed. A convenience sample (N = 69) was recruited from the healthcare professionals of the regular PACU team. The intervention group (N = 33) underwent a 6-hour ISS-based interprofessional training session. Three scenarios of deteriorating cases encountered in critical care settings were used, each followed by a debriefing period. The measured outcomes were evaluated by the Collaborative Work Questionnaire and the Satisfaction Towards Coworkers Questionnaire. Questionnaires were answered by the two groups before the intervention (T1), immediately after (T2) and six to eight weeks later (T3). We found that the change from baseline (T1) was different between the groups for global IPC (F = 3.88; p = 0.025) and for communication (F = 4.09; p = 0.021). Regarding global IPC, we observed a significant group effect from T1 to T2 (F = 5.65; p = 0.021) and from T1 to T3 (F = 5.34; p = 0.024). Furthermore, we observed a significant time effect for the experimental group (F = 4.06; p = 0.027). Regarding communication, we observed a significant group effect from T1 to T2 (F = 7.5; p = 0.001). In conclusion, ISS-based training had a slight impact on self-assessed IPC and communication during crisis event management in the PACU. The use of ISS should be promoted among critical care teams to enhance IPC and contribute to patient safety.     

Interprofessional empathy: A four-stage model for a new understanding of teamwork

ABSTRACT

Collaboration in healthcare implies that health providers share responsibility and partner with each other in order to provide comprehensive patient care. A review of the empirical literature on teamwork in healthcare settings suggests that the relationships between service providers remain conflictual and variable in commitment to interprofessional collaboration. Recently, social psychologists have given considerable attention to the possibility that empathy could be used to improve intergroup attitudes and relations. Although empathy may be referred to as a means to humanize healthcare practices, few published studies from the healthcare literature focus on the nature of interprofessional empathy. Understanding frameworks different from your own and empathizing with other members of the team is fundamental to collaborative practice. The aim of this study was to understand the nature of empathy among members of interprofessional teams within a hospital environment. This study followed the lived experience of 24 health professionals with their perspective of empathy on interprofessional teams. A two-step procedure was used consisting of semi-structured interviews and depth interviews. Phenomenological data analysis was used to identify common themes and meanings across interviews. From the findings, a four-stage developmental model of interprofessional empathy emerged: Stage 1 is engaging in conscious interactions; Stage 2 requires using dialogical communication; Stage 3 is obtained when healthcare professionals consolidate understanding through negotiating differences between each other; and Stage 4 shows mastery of nurturing the collective spirit. Knowledge of this stage model will provide clinicians with the information necessary to develop awareness of how day-to-day activities within their interprofessional teams influence the development of interprofessional empathy.     

Impact of an interprofessional transition of care service on 30-day hospital reutilizations

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of an interprofessional Transitions of Care (TOC) service on 30-day hospital reutilization inclusive of hospital readmissions and ED visits. This was a retrospective cohort study including patients discharged from an academic medical center between September 2013 and October 2014. Patients scheduled for a hospital follow-up visit in the post-acute care clinic (PACC) were included in the intervention group and patients without a post-discharge interprofessional TOC service were included in the comparison group. The intervention included a hospital follow-up visit with an interprofessional healthcare team. The primary composite outcome was hospital reutilization, defined as a hospital readmission or ED visit within 30 days of the discharge date. Overall, 330 patients were included in each group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary composite outcome was not significantly different between groups (16.97% vs. 19.39%, P = 0.4195) whereas in the per-protocol analysis (all patients who showed to their PACC appointment), the primary outcome was significantly different in favor of the intervention group (9.28% vs. 19.39%, P = 0.0009). When components were analyzed separately, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of intervention group for hospital readmissions, but there was no difference for ED visits. This study demonstrates that an outpatient interprofessional TOC service with patient engagement from a team of nurses, pharmacists, physicians, and social workers may reduce 30-day hospital readmissions but may not impact 30-day ED visits.     

The “elephant in the room”: using emotion management to uncover hidden discourses in interprofessional collaboration and teamwork

Abstract

Shared decision-making and interprofessional collaboration are important approaches to achieving consumer-centered care. The concept of shared decision-making has been expanded recently to include the interprofessional healthcare team. This study explored healthcare providers’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators to both shared decision-making and interprofessional collaboration in mental healthcare. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 healthcare providers, including medical practitioners (psychiatrists, general practitioners), pharmacists, nurses, occupational therapists, psychologists and social workers. Healthcare providers identified several factors as barriers to, and facilitators of shared decision-making that could be categorized into three major themes: factors associated with mental health consumers, factors associated with healthcare providers and factors associated with healthcare service delivery. Consumers’ lack of competence to participate was frequently perceived by mental health specialty providers to be a primary barrier to shared decision-making, while information provision on illness and treatment to consumers was cited by healthcare providers from all professions to be an important facilitator of shared decision-making. Whilst healthcare providers perceived interprofessional collaboration to be influenced by healthcare provider, environmental and systemic factors, emphasis of the factors differed among healthcare providers. To facilitate interprofessional collaboration, mental health specialty providers emphasized the importance of improving mental health expertise among general practitioners and community pharmacists, whereas general health providers were of the opinion that information sharing between providers and healthcare settings was the key. The findings of this study suggest that changes may be necessary at several levels (i.e. consumer, provider and environment) to implement effective shared decision-making and interprofessional collaboration in mental healthcare.     

Examining the implementation of collaborative competencies in a critical care setting: Key challenges for enacting competency-based education

Interprofessional collaboration is recognised as an important factor in improving patient care in intensive care units (ICUs). Competency frameworks, and more specifically interprofessional competency frameworks, are a key strategy being used to support the development of attitudes, knowledge, skills, and behaviours needed for an interprofessional approach to care. However, evidence for the application of competencies is limited. This study aimed to extend our empirically based understanding of the significance of interprofessional competencies to actual clinical practice in an ICU. An ethnographic approach was employed to obtain an in-depth insight into healthcare providers’ perspectives, behaviours, and interactions of interprofessional collaboration in a medical surgical ICU in a community teaching hospital in Canada. Approximately 160 hours of observations were undertaken and 24 semi-structured interviews with healthcare workers were conducted over a period of 6 months. Data were analysed using a directed content approach where two national competency frameworks were used to help generate an understanding of the practice of interprofessional collaboration. Healthcare professionals demonstrated numerous instances of interprofessional communication, role understandings, and teamwork in the ICU setting, which supported a number of key collaborative competencies. However, organisational factors such as pressures for discharge and patient flow, staffing, and lack of prioritisation for interprofessional learning undermined competencies designed to improve collaboration and teamwork. The findings demonstrate that interprofessional competencies can play an important role in promoting knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behaviours needed. However, competencies that promote interprofessional collaboration are dependent on a range of contextual factors that enable (or impede) individuals to actually enact these competencies.