Patient and family perceptions of interprofessional collaborative teamwork: An integrative review.

AIMS: To understand the patient and family perceptions of teamwork by synthesising existing evidence using the Interprofessional Education Collaborative Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice as a guiding framework. BACKGROUND: Advances in healthcare have resulted in more people living longer with health conditions, and patients and families have become the primary caregivers. The role of the interprofessional collaborative team supports a paradigm shift to a care model with the patient and family at the centre of healthcare decisions. However, patient and family views of interprofessional collaborative team care have rarely been studied. METHODS: The authors applied Whittmore and Knafl's methodology to conduct an integrative review of the literature. Databases searched included Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed and PsycINFO along with reference searches. The studies included were those related to patient and family perceptions of teamwork published from 2000 to 2020. The IPEC Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice served as the guiding framework for analysis. A PRISMA flow chart documented the search, inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review. RESULTS: Seventeen articles met the inclusion criteria. The findings identified differing perspectives by patients of the impact of the interprofessional collaborative team in their care which suggests that interventions to increase knowledge about interprofessional collaborative team care from the patient and family perspective may be beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited research on understanding IPC teams from the patient and family viewpoint. This review reveals incongruencies in patient and provider perspectives of IPC teams and suggests the need for additional research about patient and family perspectives of teamwork. To fully implement the IPC team vision, perceptions of teamwork must be fully understood.

Italian Translation and Validation of the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) in an Undergraduate Healthcare Student Context.

Interprofessional education requires that two or more professionals learn from and with each other to allow effective collaboration and improve health outcomes. Thus far, the interprofessional collaboration of healthcare students might be assessed using the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS), which is currently not available in its Italian version. This study aimed to provide the intercultural adaptation of the RIPLS in Italian (I-RIPLS) and assess its validity and reliability. A two-phase validation study was performed in 2020, using a single-centre approach in students enrolled in the medical degree, physiotherapy, nursing, and dentistry courses at an Italian-speaking university in Albania. The first phase of the study determined the cross-cultural adaptation of the items by involving two translators who followed a forward and backward translation process. In the second phase, a sample of 414 students was enrolled. The preliminary corrected item-total correlations showed that five items did not show significant item-to-total correlations. Even if their deletion was not mandatory for generating a suitable correlation matrix for factor analysis, the advantages of keeping only items contributing to a more stable measurement with a shorter scale represented the rationale for removing items with non-significant item-to-total correlation from the correlation matrix before testing the dimensionality of the I-RIPLS with factor analysis. The answers from the first 50% of responders (n = 207) were used to determine the most plausible dimensionality of the I-RIPLS by employing an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and the second 50% were used to cross-validate the most plausible dimensionality derived from EFA by employing confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models. The most plausible dimensionality from EFA, by acknowledging the interpretation of the scree plot, the eigenvalues greater than 1, a parallel analysis, and the previous theoretical dimensions of the tool had two factors with adequate internal consistency. The CFA confirmed the two-factor solutions and the internal consistency for each domain. The I-RIPLS has 14 items with adequate evidence of validity and reliability. Future research should revise the tool for pursuing cross-cultural multigroup measurement invariance.

Experiences of healthcare staff providing community-based mental healthcare as a multidisciplinary community mental health team in Central and Eastern Europe findings from the RECOVER-E project: an observational intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Community Mental Health Teams (CMHTs) deliver healthcare that supports the recovery of people with mental illness. The aim of this paper was to explore to what extent team members of five CMHTs newly implemented in five countries perceived that they had introduced aspects of the recovery-oriented, strength-based approach into care after a training week on recovery-oriented practice. In addition, it evaluated what the team members' perceptions on their care roles and their level of confidence with this role were. METHOD: An observational intervention study using a quantitative survey that was administered among 52 health professionals (21 Nurses, 13 Psychiatrists, 9 Psychologists, 8 Social Workers) and 14 peer workers including the Recovery Self-Assessment Tool Provider Version (RSA-P), the Team Member Self-Assessment Tool (TMSA), and demographic questions was conducted. The measures were self-reported. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate the means and standard deviations for continuous variables and frequencies and percentages for categorical variables (TMSA tool and demographic data). The standard technique to calculate scale scores for each subscale of the RSA-P was used. Bivariate linear regression analyses were applied to explore the impact of predictors on the subscales of the RSA-P. Predictors with significant effects were included in multiple regression models. RESULT: The RSA-P showed that all teams had the perception that they provide recovery-oriented practice to a moderately high degree after a training week on recovery-oriented care (mean scores between 3.85-4.46). Health professionals with fewer years of professional experience perceived more frequently that they operated in a recovery-oriented way (p = 0.036, B = - 0.268). Nurses and peer workers did not feel confident or responsible to fulfil specific roles. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that a one-week training session on community-based practices and collaborative teamwork may enhance recovery-oriented practice, but the role of nurses and peer workers needs further attention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Each trial was registered before participant enrolment in the clinicaltrials.gov database: Croatia, Zagreb (Trial Reg. No. NCT03862209 ); Montenegro, Kotor (Trial Reg. No. NCT03837340 ); Romania, Suceava (Trial Reg. No. NCT03884933 ); Macedonia, Skopje (Trial Reg. No. NCT03892473 ); Bulgaria, Sofia (Trial Reg. No. NCT03922425 ).