Quality improvement in long-term mental health: results from four collaboratives

This multiple case study evaluates four quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) in long-term mental health care focusing on social psychiatric care, recovery oriented care, social participation and somatic co-morbidity of psychiatric patients. The aim is to explore (1) effectiveness in terms of objective outcome indicators and impact of changes as perceived by team members; and (2) associations between collaborative-, organizational- and team-level factors and perceived effectiveness. Most objective outcomes, such as health, loneliness and clients' problem areas, showed significant improvement. Because of the diversity in content no single measure for objective effectiveness could be computed across the four collaboratives. Perceived effectiveness of team members was used as an indicator of the overall impact. In all, 55 of the 94 participating team leaders and 117 remaining team members completed a written survey at the end of each quality improvement collaborative. Multilevel regression analyses indicated that innovation attributes, appropriate measures, usable data collection tools and an innovative team culture could explain variation in perceived effectiveness. In conclusion, overall positive changes for clients were realized as demonstrated by objective outcomes and team members' perceptions of improvements in care processes. The results supported the notion that a layered approach is necessary to achieve improvements in quality of care.     

Team functioning and patient outcomes in stroke rehabilitation

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between rehabilitation team functioning and stroke patient outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Veterans Administration (VA) inpatient and subacute rehabilitation units. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-six VA rehabilitation teams, including 530 rehabilitation team members from 6 disciplines (medicine, nursing, social work, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech language pathology) and 1688 stroke patients treated by the teams. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ten scales assessing team member perceptions of team functioning (communication, perceived effectiveness, physician involvement, physician support, teamness, utility of quality information, innovation, interprofessional relationships, order and organization, task orientation) and 3 primary patient outcome variables-functional improvement, discharge home, and length of rehabilitation stay (LOS). RESULTS: Three of the 10 measures of team functioning were significantly associated with patient functional improvement ( P <.05): task orientation, order and organization, and utility of quality information. One measure of team functioning-effectiveness-was significantly associated with LOS ( P <.05). None of the team variables predicted discharge destination. Aspects of team functioning that were important to outcomes differed depending on the outcome of interests. Efforts directed toward improving team activities and relationships, including collaborative planning and problem solving and the use of feedback information, may enhance rehabilitation treatment effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Characteristics of team functioning predict selected rehabilitation outcomes.     

Communication and effectiveness in a US nursing home quality‐improvement collaborative

In this study, we explored the relationship between changes in resident health outcomes, practitioner communication patterns, and practitioner perceptions of group effectiveness within a quality‐improvement collaborative of nursing home clinicians. Survey and interview data were collected from nursing home clinicians participating in a quality‐improvement collaborative. Quality‐improvement outcomes were evaluated using US Federal and State minimum dataset measures. Models were specified evaluating the relationships between resident outcomes, staff perceptions of communication patterns, and staff perceptions of collaborative effectiveness. Interview data provided deeper understanding of the quantitative findings. Reductions in fall rates were highest in facilities where respondents experienced the highest levels of communication with collaborative members outside of scheduled meetings, and where respondents perceived that the collaborative kept them informed and provided new ideas. Clinicians observed that participation in a quality‐improvement collaborative positively influenced the ability to share innovative ideas and expand the quality‐improvement program within their nursing home. For practitioners, a high level of communication, both inside and outside of meetings, was key to making measurable gains in resident health outcomes.     

Difficulties in collaboration: a critical incident study of interprofessional healthcare teamwork

The challenge for members of interprofessional teams is to manage the team processes that occur in all teamwork while simultaneously managing their individual professional identities. The aim of this study was to identify and describe difficulties perceived by health professionals in interprofessional teamwork. Utterances on verbal actions and resolutions were also explored to enable a discussion of the implications for interprofessional learning. Individual interviews using a Critical Incident Technique were performed with 18 Swedish professionals working in healthcare teams, and examined with qualitative content analysis. The main findings show difficulties related to the team dynamic that arose when team members acted towards one another as representatives of their professions, difficulties that occurred when the members' various knowledge contributions interacted in the team, and difficulties related to the influence of the surrounding organization. The perceived consequences of the difficulties, beyond individual consequences, were restrictions on the use of collaborative resources to arrive at a holistic view of the patient's problem, and barriers to providing patient care and service in the desired manner. This paper also discusses how experiences of managing difficulties entailed various forms of interprofessional learning situations.     

Reports

The challenge for members of interprofessional teams is to manage the team processes that occur in all teamwork while simultaneously managing their individual professional identities. The aim of this study was to identify and describe difficulties perceived by health professionals in interprofessional teamwork. Utterances on verbal actions and resolutions were also explored to enable a discussion of the implications for interprofessional learning. Individual interviews using a Critical Incident Technique were performed with 18 Swedish professionals working in healthcare teams, and examined with qualitative content analysis. The main findings show difficulties related to the team dynamic that arose when team members acted towards one another as representatives of their professions, difficulties that occurred when the members' various knowledge contributions interacted in the team, and difficulties related to the influence of the surrounding organization. The perceived consequences of the difficulties, beyond individual consequences, were restrictions on the use of collaborative resources to arrive at a holistic view of the patient's problem, and barriers to providing patient care and service in the desired manner. This paper also discusses how experiences of managing difficulties entailed various forms of interprofessional learning situations.     

Sustainable interprofessional teamwork needs a team-friendly healthcare system: Experiences from a collaborative Dutch programme

ABSTRACT

The significance of effective interprofessional teamwork to improve the quality of care has been widely recognised. Effective interprofessional teamwork calls on good collaboration between professionals and patients, coordination between professionals, and the development of teamwork over time. Effective development of teams also requires support from the wider organisational context. In a Dutch village, healthcare professionals work closely together, and mutual consultations as well as interprofessional meetings take place on a regular basis. The network was created as a precondition for sustainable interprofessional teamwork in elderly care. However, several external barriers were experienced regarding the supportive structure and cooperative attitude of the healthcare insurer and municipality. The aim of the article is to examine these experience-based issues regarding internal organisation, perspective, and definition of effective teamwork. Complicating factors refer to finding the right key figures, and the different perspectives on team development and team effectiveness. Our conclusion is that the organisation of healthcare insurance companies needs to implement fundamental changes to facilitate an interprofessional care approach. Furthermore, municipalities should work on their vision of the needs and benefits of a fruitful collaboration with interprofessional healthcare teams. The challenge for healthcare teams is to learn to speak the language of external partners. To support the development of interprofessional teams, external parties need to recognise and trust in a shared aim to provide quality of care in an efficient and effective way.     

Professionals' perceptions of interprofessional working in community mental health teams

This paper seeks to establish whether the presence of core structures influences professionals' perceptions of interprofessional working within their teams by means of a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of all professionals working in integrated community mental health teams in an identified NHS Trust. The findings confirm that the interprofessional teams were integrated, but that the presence of meetings, Care Programme Approach policy or operational policy had little influence on perceptions of interprofessional working. Joint policies on documentation, risk and supervision were related to perceptions of interprofessional working. The majority of professionals were clear about their roles, but perceived that other members of the team did not recognise or understand these roles. Questions arise about how identified structures are operationalised in interprofessional teams. Practice areas may need to examine the effectiveness of the identified meetings and the involvement of the different professionals.     

Team type,team maturity and team effectiveness in specialist palliative home care: an exploratory questionnaire study

ABSTRACT

To meet complex needs in persons and families within specialist palliative care, care team members are expected to work together in performing a comprehensive assessment of patient needs. Team type (how integrated team members work) and team maturity (group development) have been identified as components in team effectiveness and productivity. The aim of the study reported in this paper was to identify team types in specialist palliative care in Sweden, and to explore associations between team type, team maturity and team effectiveness in home care teams. A national web-based survey of team types, based on Thylefors questionnaire, and a survey of healthcare professionals using the Group Development Questionnaire (GDQ-SE3) to assess team developmental phase, effectiveness and productivity were used in an exploratory cross-sectional design. The participants were: Specialist palliative care teams in Sweden registered in the Palliative Care Directory (n = 77), and members of 11 specialist palliative home care teams. Teams comprised physicians, registered nurses, social workers, physiotherapists and/or occupational therapists, full-or part-time. Our national web survey results showed that the 77 investigated teams had existed from 7 to 21 years, were foremost of medium size and functioned as inter- or transprofessional teams. Results from the 61 HCPs, representing 11 teams, indicated that more mature teams tended to work in an integrated manner, rather than in parallel. The effectiveness ratio varied from 52% to 86% in teams. Recommendations arising from our findings include the need for clarification of team goals and professional roles together with prioritizing the development of desirable psychosocial traits and team processes in clinical settings.     

The link between teamwork and patients' outcomes in intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Links between teamwork and outcomes have been established in a number of fields. Investigations into this link in healthcare have yielded equivocal results. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the level of self-identified teamwork in the intensive care unit and patients' outcomes. METHOD: A total of 394 staff members of 17 intensive care units completed the Group Development Questionnaire and a demographic survey. The questionnaire is a reliable and valid measure of team development and effectiveness. Each unit's predicted and actual mortality rates for the month in which data were collected were obtained. Pearson product moment correlations and analyses of variance were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Staff members of units with mortality rates that were lower than predicted perceived their teams as functioning at higher stages of group development. They perceived their team members as less dependent and more trusting than did staff members of units with mortality rates that were higher than predicted. Staff members of high-performing units also perceived their teams as more structured and organized than did staff members of lower-performing units. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study and other establish a link between teamwork and patients' outcomes in intensive care units. The evidence is sufficient to warrant the implementation of strategies designed to improve the level of teamwork and collaboration among staff members in intensive care units.     

The role of perceived team effectiveness in improving chronic illness care

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The importance of teams for improving quality of care has received increased attention. We examine both the correlates of self-assessed or perceived team effectiveness and its consequences for actually making changes to improve care for people with chronic illness. STUDY SETTING AND METHODS: Data were obtained from 40 teams participating in the national evaluation of the Improving Chronic Illness Care Program. Based on current theory and literature, measures were derived of organizational culture, a focus on patient satisfaction, presence of a team champion, team composition, perceived team effectiveness, and the actual number and depth of changes made to improve chronic illness care. RESULTS: A focus on patient satisfaction, the presence of a team champion, and the involvement of the physicians on the team were each consistently and positively associated with greater perceived team effectiveness. Maintaining a balance among culture values of participation, achievement, openness to innovation, and adherence to rules and accountability also appeared to be important. Perceived team effectiveness, in turn, was consistently associated with both a greater number and depth of changes made to improve chronic illness care. The variables examined explain between 24 and 40% of the variance in different dimensions of perceived team effectiveness; between 13% and 26% in number of changes made; and between 20% and 42% in depth of changes made. Conclusions: The data suggest the importance of developing effective teams for improving the quality of care for patients with chronic illness.     

A network model of communication in an interprofessional team of healthcare professionals: A cross-sectional study of a burn unit

Healthcare teams consist of individuals communicating with one another during patient care delivery. Coordination of multiple specialties is critical for patients with complex health conditions, and requires interprofessional and intraprofessional communication. We examined a communication network of 71 health professionals in four professional roles: physician, nurse, health management, and support personnel (dietitian, pharmacist, or social worker), or other health professionals (including physical, respiratory, and occupational therapists, and medical students) working in a burn unit. Data for this cross-sectional study were collected by surveying members of a healthcare team. Ties were defined by asking team members whom they discussed patient care matters with on the shift. We built an exponential random graph model to determine: (1) does professional role influence the likelihood of a tie; (2) are ties more likely between team members from different professions compared to between team members from the same profession; and (3) which professions are more likely to form interprofessional ties. Health management and support personnel ties were 94% interprofessional while ties among nurses were 60% interprofessional. Nurses and other health professionals were significantly less likely than physicians to form ties. Nurses were 1.64 times more likely to communicate with nurses than non-nurses (OR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.01–2.66); there was no significant role homophily for physicians, other health professionals, or health management and support personnel. Understanding communication networks in healthcare teams is an early step in understanding how teams work together to provide care; future work should evaluate the types and quality of interactions between members of interprofessional healthcare teams.     

The role of oncologists in multidisciplinary cancer teams in the UK: an untapped resource for team leadership?

Background and aims In the UK, cancer care is managed via multidisciplinary teams (MDT). Core members of these teams are typically surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, pathologists and clinical nurse specialists (with other health care professionals potentially present). Good teamwork, including team communication and leadership, has been shown to be a prerequisite for safe care delivery in other health care contexts, but cancer MDT team working processes are yet to be fully explored. This study aimed to assess the self‐perceived contribution of oncologists to MDTs, with emphasis on their potential role as team leaders. Methods Data were collected at the British Uro‐oncology Group 6th Annual Meeting (Sep 11–12 2009, York, UK). Respondents completed various items related to their perceived contribution to MDTs, aspects of current and potential MDT leadership, team decision making in these meetings, and also demographic information. Results Seventy‐seven oncologists attended the meeting, of whom 61 fully completed the survey (response rate 79%). Oncologists reported that their contribution to the MDT discussion carries equal weight to those of surgeons, radiologists and pathologists. Whereas 83% of respondents reported that MDT chairmanship could rotate, only 39% reported that it does in their own MDTs. More than 90% of respondents thought that oncologists (clinical or medical) could chair these meetings, but only 25% of them had ever chaired their own MDT. Conclusions Despite a high level of contribution to MDTs and the respect of their colleagues, oncologists are not taking leadership roles within MDTs at the level that they expect. This study raises the question of whether a re‐evaluation the leadership of MDTs is required with clinicians from a variety of specialities being given opportunities to develop skills necessary to lead cancer MDTs and improve team performance and ultimately cancer care.     

Professionals' perceptions of interprofessional working in community mental health teams

This paper seeks to establish whether the presence of core structures influences professionals' perceptions of interprofessional working within their teams by means of a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of all professionals working in integrated community mental health teams in an identified NHS Trust. The findings confirm that the interprofessional teams were integrated, but that the presence of meetings, Care Programme Approach policy or operational policy had little influence on perceptions of interprofessional working. Joint policies on documentation, risk and supervision were related to perceptions of interprofessional working. The majority of professionals were clear about their roles, but perceived that other members of the team did not recognise or understand these roles. Questions arise about how identified structures are operationalised in interprofessional teams. Practice areas may need to examine the effectiveness of the identified meetings and the involvement of the different professionals.     

Every team needs a coach: Training for interprofessional clinical placements

Despite growing awareness of the benefits of interprofessional education and interprofessional collaboration (IPC), understanding how teams successfully transition to IPC is limited. Student exposure to interprofessional teams fosters the learners’ integration and application of classroom-based interprofessional theory to practice. A further benefit might be reinforcing the value of IPC to members of the mentoring team and strengthening their IPC. The research question for this study was: Does training in IPC and clinical team facilitation and mentorship of pre-licensure learners during interprofessional clinical placements improve the mentoring teams’ collaborative working relationships compared to control teams? Statistical analyses included repeated time analysis multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Teams on four clinical units participated in the project. Impact on intervention teams pre- versus post-interprofessional clinical placement was modest with only the Cost of Team score of the Attitudes Towards Healthcare Team Scale improving relative to controls (p = 0.059) although reflective evaluations by intervention team members noted many perceived benefits of interprofessional clinical placements. The significantly higher group scores for control teams (geriatric and palliative care) on three of four subscales of the Assessment of Interprofessional Team Collaboration Scale underscore our need to better understand the unique features within geriatric and palliative care settings that foster superior IPC and to recognise that the transition to IPC likely requires a more diverse intervention than the interprofessional clinical placement experience implemented in this study. More recently, it is encouraging to see the development of innovative tools that use an evidence-based, multi-dimensional approach to support teams in their transition to IPC.     

Supplementary nurse prescribing

AIM: To explore the attitudes of multidisciplinary team members to nurse prescribing and to establish its perceived advantages and disadvantages. METHOD: Five focus groups were conducted with a range of healthcare professionals in one trust. A total of 46 participants took part in the study A structured schedule was used during each discussion to elicit group members' views on supplementary nurse prescribing. The data were analysed thematically and key themes and concepts were identified. FINDINGS: These are summarised under five main headings: what is supplementary prescribing?; why introduce supplementary prescribing?; perceived benefits of supplementary prescribing; concerns about supplementary prescribing; and skills necessary for supplementary prescribing. Analysis of the data suggests that although teams were generally supportive of nurse prescribing they are largely confused about what is being recommended and why. There was concern about how nurse prescribing will be implemented and its potential to disrupt team functioning. CONCLUSION: A considerable amount of preparation will be required to ensure that nurse prescribers have the organisational and team support to adapt to their new roles.     

Variables associated with interprofessional collaboration: The case of professionals working in Quebec local mental health service networks

This study identified variables associated with interprofessional collaboration (IPC) among 315 mental health (MH) professionals working in primary health care (PHC) and specialized teams, within four Quebec (Canada) local service networks (LSNs). IPC was measured with a validated scale, and independent variables were organized according to a four-block conceptual framework that included Individual, Interactional, Organizational and Professional Role Characteristics. Bivariate and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. Five variables were associated with Interactional Characteristics (knowledge sharing, knowledge integration, affective commitment toward the team, team climate, team autonomy), and one variable with Professional Role (multifocal identification) and Individual Characteristics (age), respectively. Findings suggest the importance of positive team climate, knowledge sharing and knowledge integration, professional and team identification (multifocal identification), team commitment and autonomy for strengthening IPC in MH teams. These results suggest that team managers should remain alert to behavioral changes and tensions in their teams that could signal possible deterioration in IPC, while promoting IPC competencies, and interdisciplinary values and skills, in team activities and training programs. As well, the encouragement of team commitment on the part of senior professionals, and support toward their younger counterparts, may enhance IPC in teams.     

Modelling the effect of perceived interdependence among mental healthcare professionals on their work role performance

The purpose of mental healthcare system reform was to enhance service efficiency by strengthening primary mental healthcare and increasing service integration in communities. Reinforcing interprofessional teamwork also intended to address the extensive and multidimensional needs of patients with mental disorders by bringing together a broader array of expertise. In this context, mental healthcare professionals (MHCPs) from various health and social care professions are more interdependent in many aspects of their work (tasks, resources, and goals). We wanted to examine the effect of perceived interdependence among MHCPs on their work role performance in the context of mental healthcare. For this purpose, we developed and tested a model coherent with the Input-Mediator-Outcome-Input (IMOI) framework of team effectiveness. Data from questionnaires administered to 315 MHCPs from four local health service networks in Quebec, Canada were analysed through structural equation modelling and mediation analysis. The structural equation model provided a good fit for the data and explained 51% of the variance of work role performance. Perceived collaboration, confidence in the advantages of interprofessional collaboration, involvement in the decision process, knowledge sharing, and satisfaction with the nature of the work partially mediated the effect of perceived interdependence among team members on work role performance. Therefore, perceived interdependence among team members had a positive impact on the work role performance of MHCPs mostly through its effect on favourable team functioning features. This implies, in practice, that increased interdependence of MHCPs would be more likely to truly enhance work role performance if team-based interventions to promote collaborative work and interprofessional teaching and training programs to support work within interprofessional teams were jointly implemented. Participation in the decision process and knowledge sharing should also be fostered, for instance, by adopting knowledge management best practices.     

Enhancing team learning in nursing teams through beliefs about interpersonal context

Aim. This article is a report of a study that examines the relationship between team‐level learning and performance in nursing teams, and the role of beliefs about the interpersonal context in this relationship. Background. Over recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the learning processes of work teams. Researchers have investigated the impact of team learning on team performance, and the enabling conditions for this learning. However, team learning in nursing teams has been largely ignored. Design. A cross‐sectional field survey design was used. Methods. The sample comprises a total of 468 healthcare professionals working in 89 nursing teams at different public hospitals throughout Spain. Members of nursing teams participated voluntarily by completing a confidential individual questionnaire. Team supervisors evaluated nursing teams’ performance. Data were collected over 2007–2008. Results. The results show a mediating effect of team learning on the relationship between beliefs about interpersonal context (psychological safety, perceived task interdependence, and group potency) and team performance. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that beliefs about interpersonal context and team learning are important to effective nursing team performance.     

Team effectiveness in academic primary health care teams

Primary health care is undergoing significant organizational change, including the development of interdisciplinary health care teams. Understanding how teams function effectively in primary care will assist training programs in teaching effective interprofessional practices. This study aimed to explore the views of members of primary health care teams regarding what constitutes a team, team effectiveness and the factors that affect team effectiveness in primary care. Focus group consultations from six teams in the Department of Family Medicine at Queen's University were recorded and transcribed and qualitative analysis was used to identify themes. Twelve themes were identified that related to the impact of dual goals/obligations of education and clinical/patient practice on team relationships and learners; the challenges of determining team membership including nonattendance of allied health professionals except nurses; and facilitators and barriers to effective team function. This study provides insight into some of the challenges of developing effective primary care teams in an academic department of family medicine. Clear goals and attention to teamwork at all levels of collaboration is needed if effective interprofessional education is to be achieved. Future research should clarify how best to support the changes required for increasingly effective teamwork.     

Teamwork in the operating theatre: cohesion or confusion?

RATIONALE: The aim of the research that we report here was to empirically assess the cohesiveness of the multidisciplinary operating theatre (OT) team. METHOD: We used concepts from the team performance and team mental models literature to assess OT professionals' perceptions of their teamwork, the structure of their teams and their respective roles within them and their teams' performance. RESULTS: Team structure: OT professionals would welcome a change from the current structure of the team, although there was no agreement on what that structure is. Nurses perceived the team as unitary, surgeons and anaesthetists perceived it as comprising multiple subteams. Team roles: OT professionals tended to overrate their own understanding of their colleagues' role in the OT relative to the role understanding that the colleagues attributed to them. This tendency was especially marked for the surgeons. Team communication and team performance: OT professionals agreed on the relative importance of the various communicating pairs in the OT. Moreover, they were satisfied with the quality of communication among them, except for the communication between the surgeon and the anaesthetist, which received lower ratings. Finally, the quality of the teamwork in the OT was deemed acceptable, although there is room for improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The OT environment need not be as cohesive as previously assumed--a finding that carries implications for the effectiveness of team training interventions. Further research is needed in order to fully comprehend the dynamics of the OT as a working environment and, most importantly, their relation to patient safety.