Interprofessional teamwork innovations for primary health care practices and practitioners: evidence from a comparison of reform in three countries
Authors Harris M, Advocat J, Crabtree B, Levesque J, Miller W, Gunn J, Hogg W, Scott C, Chase S, Halma L, Russell G
Received 29 September 2015
Accepted for publication 27 November 2015
Published 29 January 2016 Volume 2016:9 Pages 35—46
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Devang Sanghavi
Peer reviewer comments 4
Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser
Mark F Harris,1 Jenny Advocat,2 Benjamin F Crabtree,3 Jean-Frederic Levesque,1,4 William L Miller,5 Jane M Gunn,6 William Hogg,7 Cathie M Scott,8 Sabrina M Chase,9 Lisa Halma,10 Grant M Russell11
1Center for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2Southern Academic Primary Care Research Unit, School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, Notting Hill, VIC, Australia; 3Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; 4Bureau of Health Information, NSW Government, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 5Department of Family Medicine, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA, USA; 6Department of General Practice, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; 7The CT Lamont Primary Care Research Center, The University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, 8Alberta Centre for Child, Family, and Community Research, University of Calgary, AB, Canada; 9Rutgers University, Rutgers School of Nursing, Rutgers, NJ, USA; 10Alberta Health Services, Lethbridge, AB, Canada; 11School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, Notting Hill, VIC, Australia
Context: A key aim of reforms to primary health care (PHC) in many countries has been to enhance interprofessional teamwork. However, the impact of these changes on practitioners has not been well understood.
Objective: To assess the impact of reform policies and interventions that have aimed to create or enhance teamwork on professional communication relationships, roles, and work satisfaction in PHC practices.
Design: Collaborative synthesis of 12 mixed methods studies.
Setting: Primary care practices undergoing transformational change in three countries: Australia, Canada, and the USA, including three Canadian provinces (Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec).
Methods: We conducted a synthesis and secondary analysis of 12 qualitative and quantitative studies conducted by the authors in order to understand the impacts and how they were influenced by local context.
Results: There was a diverse range of complex reforms seeking to foster interprofessional teamwork in the care of patients with chronic disease. The impact on communication and relationships between different professional groups, the roles of nursing and allied health services, and the expressed satisfaction of PHC providers with their work varied more within than between jurisdictions. These variations were associated with local contextual factors such as the size, power dynamics, leadership, and physical environment of the practice. Unintended consequences included deterioration of the work satisfaction of some team members and conflict between medical and nonmedical professional groups.
Conclusion: The variation in impacts can be understood to have arisen from the complexity of interprofessional dynamics at the practice level. The same characteristic could have both positive and negative influence on different aspects (eg, larger practice may have less capacity for adoption but more capacity to support interprofessional practice). Thus, the impacts are not entirely predictable and need to be monitored, and so that interventions can be adapted at the local level.
Keywords: interprofessional care, primary health care, teamwork, research synthesis
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]
Readers of this article also read:
Interprofessional team management in pediatric critical care: some challenges and possible solutions
Stocker M, Pilgrim SB, Burmester M, Allen ML, Gijselaers WH
Published Date: 24 February 2016
Home care assistants’ perspectives on detecting mental health problems and promoting mental health among community-dwelling seniors with multimorbidity
Grundberg Å, Hansson A, Religa D, Hillerås P
Published Date: 23 February 2016
Ryall T, Judd BK, Gordon CJ
Published Date: 22 February 2016
Postpartum depression screening in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: program development, implementation, and lessons learned
Cherry AS, Blucker RT, Thornberry TS, Hetherington C, McCaffree MA, Gillaspy SR
Published Date: 18 February 2016
Facebook as a tool for communication, collaboration, and informal knowledge exchange among members of a multisite family health team
Lofters AK, Slater MB, Nicholas Angl E, Leung FH
Published Date: 25 January 2016
Anxiety mediates the effect of smoking on insomnia in people with asthma: evidence from the HUNT3 study
Andenæs R, Schwartz CE
Published Date: 21 January 2016
Management of Charcot–Marie–Tooth disease: improving long-term care with a multidisciplinary approach
McCorquodale D, Pucillo EM, Johnson NE
Published Date: 19 January 2016
Risk factors for hearing loss in infants under universal hearing screening program in Northern Thailand
Poonual W, Navacharoen N, Kangsanarak J, Namwongprom S
Published Date: 24 December 2015