Improving departmental psychological safety through a medical school-wide initiative.

BACKGROUND: Psychological safety is a team-based phenomenon whereby group members are empowered to ask questions, take appropriate risks, admit mistakes, propose novel ideas, and candidly voice concerns. Growing research supports the benefits of psychological safety in healthcare and education for patient safety, learning, and innovation. However, there is a paucity of research on how to create psychological safety, especially within academic medicine. To meet this need, the present study describes and evaluates a multi-year, medical school-wide psychological safety initiative. METHODS: We created, implemented, and assessed a multi-pronged psychological safety initiative including educational training sessions, departmental champions, videos, infographics, and targeted training for medical school leaders. Employees' perceptions of psychological safety at both the departmental and institutional levels were assessed annually. The impact of educational training sessions was quantified by post-session surveys. RESULTS: Deidentified employee surveys revealed a statistically significant increase in departmental psychological safety between the first and second annual surveys. Perceived psychological safety remained lower at the institution-wide level than at the departmental level. No significant differences in psychological safety were observed based on gender, position, or employment length. Post-educational training session surveys showed that the sessions significantly increased knowledge of the topic as well as motivation to create a culture of psychological safety within the medical school. CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes an evidence-based method for increasing psychological safety within medical school departments and serves as a template for other health professions schools seeking to promote psychological safety. Training leadership, faculty, and staff is an important first step towards creating a culture of psychological safety for everyone, including trainees.

The Effects of Mobile Primary Health Teams: Evidence from the Médico del Barrio Strategy in Ecuador.

Starting in 2017, Ecuador gradually expanded its primary healthcare access program nationwide using mobile traveling healthcare teams through the Estrategia Médico del Barrio (EMB) [or Neighborhood Doctor Strategy]. EMB teams, composed of a primary care physician, a nurse, and a community health worker, made home visits in marginalized areas. We estimate the impact of the EMB on health and utilization outcomes using nationally representative household surveys for 2006 (N=55,666), 2012-13 (N=92,500) and 2018-19 (N=168,747). The treatment variable at the extensive margin is any exposure to EMB at the canton level. At the intensive margin, we use exposure in terms of weeks covered by EMB and the number and composition of EMB personnel per 1000 population. We identify outcomes of treated vs. non- or partially-treated cantons based on the random combination of the timing of the start of the program's implementation and the timing of the survey interview, which varied across cantons. We use difference-in-difference (DD) and difference-in-difference-in-difference (DDD) frameworks, the latter for cantons with high indigenous concentration. We find significant effects on the reported health problem and preventive care, but mixed results in terms of curative healthcare. The DDD specification shows that EMB improved health problem diagnoses and preventive healthcare utilization, including in highly indigenous cantons, yet it seemed to have had mixed results in terms of curative care use in Ecuador. Various alternative specifications and robustness tests do not qualitatively alter the main findings.

Can team coaching provide healthcare the remedy it needs?

The healthcare industry is inadvertently a teamwork industry - and yet - little time is devoted to improving teamwork on the field. As a response to this issue, team development intervention (TDI) tools have flourished. Findings suggest the capability for TDIs to better team competencies, and potentially mitigate prominent healthcare problems. However, team coaching has been excluded as a potential TDI for healthcare. For this reason, we seek to 1) discuss existing team coaching models, integrating findings across the literature, 2) highlight the advantages of Hackman and Wageman (2005)'s model over others, 3) display its empirically-corroborated propositions, and finally, 4) provide general guidance on how to move forward. We move beyond extant literature by providing an outline on what outcomes team coaching can and cannot yield, accumulating evidence from fields outside of healthcare and incorporating team coaching into the TDI literature. By doing so, we hope empirical research on team coaching is incentivized, resulting in an efficient and accessible TDI for healthcare professionals and the field of interprofessional care.

Room for resilience: a qualitative study about accountability mechanisms in the relation between work-as-done (WAD) and work-as-imagined (WAI) in hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Central to Safety-II is promoting resilience of healthcare practices. In the "Room for Resilience" research project we focus on the role of horizontal and vertical accountability in healthcare teams and aim to discover how the relation between the two impacts team reflections and discussions. In this article, we report on an explorative study at the start of the project which aimed to assess the structures and dynamics of horizontal and vertical accountability. METHODS: A qualitative study in six teams in three hospitals in the Netherlands. For the project, each team selected a specific clinical process to work on (e.g. pain assessment). We interviewed healthcare professionals, managers, and quality advisors about these processes, how they are discussed in practice and how teams need to account for them. Additionally, we observed the processes and how teams discuss them in practice. In total, we conducted 35 interviews and 67.5 h of observation. Transcripts and field notes were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Professionals at times varied in what they considered the right approach in the clinical process, with differing views on the importance of certain actions. When processes were discussed, this mostly was done during clinical work, and it often concerned reflections about the care for a specific patient instead of reflecting on the team's general approach of the clinical process. Organized reflections on the processes were sparse. How processes were conducted in practice deviated from guidelines, mainly due to staff shortages, a perceived lack of value of a guideline, equipment issues, and collaboration issues. For most processes, accountability to hierarchical layers consisted of quality indicator scores. Professionals were tasked with registering indicator data but did not find this meaningful for their work. CONCLUSIONS: The observed different perspectives within teams on what good quality care is show the importance of having team reflections about these processes. How vertical accountability was organized at times impacted the conditions for teams to discuss resilient performance. Following these findings, we recommend that reflection on resilient practice and the role of accountability processes is organized on all levels in (and outside) the organization.

The feasibility and acceptability of implementing video reflexive ethnography (VRE) as an improvement tool in acute maternity services.

BACKGROUND: Video-reflexive ethnography (VRE) has been argued to be an alternative approach to collaborative learning in healthcare teams, more able to capture the complexities of the healthcare environment than simulation. This study aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of employing VRE as an improvement tool in acute maternity services. METHOD: Focused ethnography and semi-structured interviews (n = 17) explored the feasibility of employing VRE from the perspective of the researcher-facilitator, and that of the healthcare staff participants. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to generate key themes. RESULTS: We identified four themes related to feasibility of employing VRE as an improvement approach: laying the groundwork; challenges of capturing in-situ video footage; effective facilitation of reflexive feedback; and, power to change. Of note was the central role of the facilitator in building and maintaining staff trust in the process, particularly in being able to guide collaborative, non-punitive discussion during reflexive feedback sessions. Interestingly, when considering implementation of change, structural hierarchies were evident with more senior staff better able to develop and effect ideas. Two themes related to acceptability of VRE among healthcare staff were identified: staff response to the role of VRE in improvement; and the power of a different perspective. Staff were overwhelmingly positive about their experience of VRE, particularly appreciating the time, space and autonomy it afforded them to navigate and articulate ideas for change and improvement. CONCLUSION: VRE is both feasible and acceptable as an improvement tool with acute, multi-disciplinary maternity staff teams. It is an important healthcare improvement tool that could prompt the development and maintenance of team resilience factors in the face of increasing stress and burn-out of healthcare staff in maternity services.

A mixed-methods program evaluation of the Alda Healthcare Experience- a program to improve healthcare team communication.

BACKGROUND: Communication among interprofessional healthcare worker teams is critical to ensure a thriving and resilient workforce. We will evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the Alda Healthcare Experience (AHE), a novel medical improvisation (improv) workshop designed to improve interprofessional communication skills among healthcare professionals. The AHE workshop includes a two-hour experiential training workshop led by an improv specialist and a clinical co-facilitator. In July 2022 we began implementing the AHE workshop by training 18 clinical co-facilitators who will co-facilitate the workshops for 550 healthcare workers from five hospital departments at Stony Brook University Hospital over the course of a year and a half. Using mixed-methods, we will conduct an Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Design project that includes an outcome evaluation (effectiveness) and a process evaluation (implementation). METHODS: Our outcome evaluation will assess the impact of the AHE workshop on short- and long-term improvement in interprofessional communication, stress, and professional fulfillment. The process evaluation component will examine programmatic, organizational, and individual facilitators or barriers to effective implementation of the AHE workshop. Qualitative methods will include dimensional analysis employing individual interviews of 20-40 AHE Project Participants, 5-10 Selected Informants, and all the clinical co-facilitators. Quantitative methods will use a quasi-experimental longitudinal design with an intervention group and surveillance of a control group (wait-list) and repeated assessments using validated instruments measuring communications skills, professional fulfillment, stress, burnout, uncertainty tolerance, and teamwork. DISCUSSION: Effective and efficient communication within healthcare teams is fundamental to building team cohesion that, in turn, supports individual resilience and builds positive organizational culture. The AHE program is an innovative approach to improve interprofessional healthcare communication and reduce healthcare worker burnout. In addition to institutional buy-in, rigorous evaluations of medical improv programs are necessary as a critical step in making such programs scalable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: N/A.

Evaluation of United States chiropractic professional subgroups: a survey of randomly sampled chiropractors.

BACKGROUND: Professional subgroups are common and may play a role in aiding professional maturity or impeding professional legitimization. The chiropractic profession in the United States has a long history of diverse intra-professional subgroups with varying ideologies and practice styles. To our knowledge, large-scale quantification of chiropractic professional subgroups in the United States has not been conducted. The purpose of this study was to quantify and describe the clinical practice beliefs and behaviors associated with United States chiropractic subgroups. METHODS: A 10% random sample of United States licensed chiropractors (n = 8975) was selected from all 50 state regulatory board lists and invited to participate in a survey. The survey consisted of a 7-item questionnaire; 6 items were associated with chiropractic ideological and practice characteristics and 1 item was related to the self-identified role of chiropractic in the healthcare system which was utilized as the dependent variable to identify chiropractic subgroups. Multinomial logistic regression with predictive margins was used to analyze which responses to the 6 ideology and practice characteristic items were predictive of chiropractic subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 3538 responses were collected (39.4% response rate). Respondents self-identified into three distinct subgroups based on the perceived role of the chiropractic profession in the greater healthcare system: 56.8% were spine/neuromusculoskeletal focused; 22.0% were primary care focused; and 21.2% were vertebral subluxation focused. Patterns of responses to the 6 ideologies and practice characteristic items were substantially different across the three professional subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents self-identified into one of three distinct intra-professional subgroups. These subgroups can be differentiated along themes related to clinical practice beliefs and behaviors.

Healthcare teams and patient-related terminology: a review of concepts and uses.

BACKGROUND: Discussions concerning health care teams and patient-related terminology remain an ongoing debate. Terms such as interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary, as well as interprofessional are ambiguously defined and frequently used, rightly or wrongly, interchangeably. Also, clarification on the terminology regarding patients is rarely explicitly addressed in the health care team's literature, potentially resulting in confusion among health professional students, novice researchers, and practitioners. METHODS: A structured literature review was conducted. Electronic searches were performed from August 2018 to September 2019 on the following databases: CINHAL, Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Nursing and Allied Health and JSTOR. The following terms were used: 'terminology', 'team(s)', 'nursing', 'health', 'medical', 'education', 'interprofessional', 'interdisciplinary', 'multidisciplinary', 'transdisciplinary', 'collaboration', 'patient', 'client', 'customer', 'user' and 'person'. RESULTS: Small but significant nuances in the use of language and its implications for patient care can be made visible for health professional education and clinical practice. Healthcare is necessarily interdisciplinary and therefore we are obligated, and privileged, to think more critically about the use of terminology to ensure we are supporting high-quality evidence and knowledge application. CONCLUSION: To avoid confusion and lack of consistency in the peer-review literature, authors should be encouraged to offer brief definitions and the rationale for the use of a particular term or group of term. In addition, a deeper understanding of the values that each patient-related term represents for particular disciplines or health care professions is essential to achieve a more comprehensive conceptual rigour.

Measuring psychological safety in healthcare teams: developing an observational measure to complement survey methods.

BACKGROUND: Psychological safety is a dynamic team-level phenomenon which exists when team members believe that it is safe to take interpersonal risks. In healthcare teams, the presence of psychological safety is critical to delivering safe care. Scholars have highlighted a need for alternative measures which compliment survey-based measures of psychological safety in healthcare teams. METHODS: The exploratory phase of this study raised concerns about whether current survey measures could provide a sufficient understanding of psychological safety within healthcare teams to inform strategies to improve it. Thus, previously validated psychological safety surveys and a meeting observation measure were adapted for use in healthcare teams. First, two group feedback sessions were held with 22 healthcare professionals, as well as a systematic literature review. Then, the members of eleven healthcare teams in Ireland and The Netherlands (n = 135) took part in the pilot test of the adapted composite measure. RESULTS: The final composite measure has two parts: a team meeting observation measure and an adapted survey. The observation measure has 31 observable behaviours fitting seven categories: voice, defensive voice, silence behaviours, supportive, unsupportive, learning or improvement-oriented and familiarity type behaviours. The survey part consists of 19 items in three sub-dimensions related to; the team leader, other team members and the team as a whole. Three additional items capture the perceived representativeness of the observed team meeting compared to other similar meetings. Final adaptations were made in order to integrate the observation and survey measure. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting composite measure combines the strengths of observational and survey measures and is tailored for use in healthcare teams. It is uniquely co-developed with healthcare professionals and grounded in the psychological safety and healthcare literature. This composite measure can enable longitudinal research on psychological safety and inform future research to develop and test interventions to improve psychological safety.

Interventions to improve team effectiveness within health care: a systematic review of the past decade.

BACKGROUND: A high variety of team interventions aims to improve team performance outcomes. In 2008, we conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of the scientific studies focused on these interventions. However, over the past decade, the literature on team interventions has rapidly evolved. An updated overview is therefore required, and it will focus on all possible team interventions without restrictions to a type of intervention, setting, or research design. OBJECTIVES: To review the literature from the past decade on interventions with the goal of improving team effectiveness within healthcare organizations and identify the "evidence base" levels of the research. METHODS: Seven major databases were systematically searched for relevant articles published between 2008 and July 2018. Of the original search yield of 6025 studies, 297 studies met the inclusion criteria according to three independent authors and were subsequently included for analysis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Scale was used to assess the level of empirical evidence. RESULTS: Three types of interventions were distinguished: (1) Training, which is sub-divided into training that is based on predefined principles (i.e. CRM: crew resource management and TeamSTEPPS: Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety), on a specific method (i.e. simulation), or on general team training. (2) Tools covers tools that structure (i.e. SBAR: Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation, (de)briefing checklists, and rounds), facilitate (through communication technology), or trigger (through monitoring and feedback) teamwork. (3) Organizational (re)design is about (re)designing structures to stimulate team processes and team functioning. (4) A programme is a combination of the previous types. The majority of studies evaluated a training focused on the (acute) hospital care setting. Most of the evaluated interventions focused on improving non-technical skills and provided evidence of improvements. CONCLUSION: Over the last decade, the number of studies on team interventions has increased exponentially. At the same time, research tends to focus on certain interventions, settings, and/or outcomes. Principle-based training (i.e. CRM and TeamSTEPPS) and simulation-based training seem to provide the greatest opportunities for reaching the improvement goals in team functioning.

Exploring psychological safety in healthcare teams to inform the development of interventions: combining observational, survey and interview data.

BACKGROUND: Psychological safety allows healthcare professionals to take the interpersonal risks needed to engage in effective teamwork and to maintain patient safety. In order to improve psychological safety in healthcare teams, an in-depth understanding of the complex and nuanced nature of psychological safety is needed. Psychological safety concepts, including voice, silence, learning behaviour, support and familiarity, informed the current study's investigation of psychological safety. This study aims to use a mixed-methods approach to develop an in-depth understanding of psychological safety within healthcare teams and to build on this understanding to inform the development of future interventions to improve it. METHODS: Survey, observational and interview data are triangulated in order to develop an in- depth understanding of psychological safety within four healthcare teams, working within one case study hospital. The teams taking part included one multidisciplinary and three unidisciplinary teams. Observational and survey data were collected during and immediately following team meetings. Individual interviews were conducted with 31 individuals across the four teams. Thematic analysis was used to analyse these interviews. RESULTS: Survey results indicated a high level of psychological safety. However, observations and interviews captured examples of silence and situations where participants felt less psychologically safe. Findings from across all three data sources are discussed in relation to voice and silence, learning, familiarity and support. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide a detailed description and in-depth understanding of psychological safety within four healthcare teams. Based on this, recommendations are made for future research and the development of interventions to improve psychological safety.

A systematic review of factors that enable psychological safety in healthcare teams.

PURPOSE: The current systematic review will identify enablers of psychological safety within the literature in order to produce a comprehensive list of factors that enable psychological safety specific to healthcare teams. DATA SOURCES: A keyword search strategy was developed and used to search the following electronic databases PsycINFO, ABI/INFORM, Academic search complete and PubMed and grey literature databases OpenGrey, OCLC WorldCAT and Espace. STUDY SELECTION: Peer-reviewed studies relevant to enablers of psychological safety in healthcare setting that were published between 1999 and 2019 were eligible for inclusion. Covidence, an online specialized systematic review website, was used to screen records. Data extraction, quality appraisal and narrative synthesis were conducted on identified papers. DATA EXTRACTION: Thirty-six relevant studies were identified for full review and data extraction. A data extraction template was developed and included sections for the study methodology and the specific enablers identified within each study. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Identified studies were reviewed using a narrative synthesis. Within the 36 articles reviewed, 13 enablers from across organizational, team and individual levels were identified. These enablers were grouped according to five broader themes: priority for patient safety, improvement or learning orientation, support, familiarity with colleagues, status, hierarchy and inclusiveness and individual differences. CONCLUSION: This systematic review of psychological safety literature identifies a list of enablers of psychological safety within healthcare teams. This list can be used as a first step in developing observational measures and interventions to improve psychological safety in healthcare teams.

A qualitative content analysis of retained surgical items: learning from root cause analysis investigations.

OBJECTIVE: To describe incidents of retained surgical items, including their characteristics and the circumstances in which they occur. DESIGN: A qualitative content analysis of root cause analysis investigation reports. SETTING: Public health services in Victoria, Australia, 2010-2015. PARTICIPANTS: Incidents of retained surgical items as described by 31 root cause analysis investigation reports. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The type of retained surgical item, the length of time between the item being retained and detected and qualitative descriptors of the contributing factors and the circumstances in which the retained surgical items occurred. RESULTS: Surgical packs, drain tubes and vascular devices comprised 68% (21/31) of the retained surgical items. Nearly one-quarter of the retained surgical items were detected either immediately in the post-operative period or on the day of the procedure (7/31). However, about one-sixth (5/31) were only detected after 6 months, with the longest period being 18 months. Contributing factors included complex or multistage surgery; the use of packs not specific to the purpose of the surgery; and design features of the surgical items. CONCLUSION: Retained drains occurred in the post-operative phase where surgical counts are not applicable and clinician situational awareness may not be as great. Root cause analysis investigation reports can be a valuable means of characterizing infrequently occurring adverse events such as retained surgical items. They may detect incidents that are not detected by other data collections and can inform the design enhancements and development of technologies to reduce the impact of retained surgical items.

Networks of hospital discharge planning teams and readmissions.

Improving the hospital discharge process to prevent readmission requires a focus on the coordination and communication between interprofessional team members in and outside of the hospital as well as with patients and their caregivers. Yet little is known about how these actors currently communicate and coordinate during the discharge process. Network analysis allows for a direct look at this communication and coordination. This network analysis study utilized retrospective chart review to identify the individuals involved in the discharge planning and their communication with each other for 205 patients. Using this abstracted data, a network was created for each patient wherein a node was any individual involved in the patient's discharge planning process and a tie was any communication documented in the chart related to discharge planning between individuals. Graphical and structural network analyses were used to compare the networks of readmitted patients and non-readmitted patients. Networks of patients not readmitted were more hierarchical, unidirectional, streamlined compared to those readmitted. These findings demonstrate the feasibility and usefulness of conceptualizing discharge planning as a network. Future efforts to understand discharge planning and create interventions to improve the process may benefit by considering network patterns of communication.

Gender issues in physician-nurse collaboration in healthcare teams: Findings from a cross-sectional study.

AIMS: The aims of the study were (a) to assess whether the proportion of female nurses and female physicians in a given unit influences the attitude of collaboration between nurses and physicians as reported by nurses, and (b) to examine how these two dimensions interact to influence attitudes towards cooperation. BACKGROUND: Available studies have documented that gender influences the collaboration between physicians and nurses, but no have explored the influence of specific combinations-such as a high proportion of female nurses and a high proportion of female physicians. METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 700 nurses working in 36 hospital units in Italy. The validated Italian version of the Jefferson Scale of Attitudes towards Physician-Nurse Collaboration was used. A three stages hierarchical linear regression was performed by entering: (a) the control variables at the individual and at the unit levels, (b) the proportion of female nurses and physicians and (c) the two-way interaction. RESULTS: A total of 430 nurses participated; the average Jefferson Scale of Attitudes towards Physician-Nurse Collaboration total score was 48.64 ± 5.27. At the second and third stages of the hierarchical linear regression model (explaining 12.8% and 14.1% of the Jefferson Scale of Attitudes towards Physician-Nurse Collaboration variance, respectively), having more female RNs as staff (model two: ß = 0.61, p =< .1; model three: ß = 0.69, p =< .05) was significantly associated with higher Jefferson Scale of Attitudes towards Physician-Nurse Collaboration scores; differently, higher physician-nurse ratios (model two: ß = -4.09, p =< .05; model three: ß = -4.54, p =< .01), and more female physicians (model two: ß = -1.06, p =< .05; model three: ß = -1.29, p =< .01) were associated with lower Jefferson Scale of Attitudes towards Physician-Nurse Collaboration scores. CONCLUSION: There is a decreased collaboration as reported by nurses when predominantly male nursing teams interact with teams with more female physicians. However, in units lead by female physicians, having more female members among the nursing team, ensures increased attitudes of collaboration as reported by nurses. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: With the increasing proportion of female physicians and male nurses, unit mangers should be prepared to manage their influence on interprofessional cooperation.

Interprofessional team member's satisfaction: a mixed methods study of a Chilean hospital.

INTRODUCTION: The health organizations of today are highly complex and specialized. Given this scenario, there is a need for health professionals to work collaboratively within interprofessional work teams to ensure quality and safe care. To strengthen interprofessional teamwork, it is imperative that health organizations enhance strategic human resources management by promoting team member satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the satisfaction of members in interprofessional teams and to explore interpersonal relationships, leadership, and team climate in a hospital context. METHODOLOGY: This study is an explanatory sequential mixed methods (quantitative/qualitative) study of 53 teams (409 professionals) at a university hospital in Santiago, Chile. The first phase involved quantitative surveys with team members examining team satisfaction, transformational leadership, and team climate. Social network analysis was used to identify interactions among team members (cohesion and centrality). The second phase involved interviews with 15 professionals belonging to teams with the highest and lowest team satisfaction scores. Findings of both phases were integrated. RESULTS: Significant associations were found among variables, and the linear regression model showed that team climate (ß = 0.26) was a better predictor of team satisfaction than team leadership (ß = 0.17). Registered nurse was perceived as the profession with the highest score on the transformational leadership measure (mean = 64), followed by the physician (mean = 33). Team networks with the highest and lowest score of team satisfaction showed differences in cohesion and centrality measures. Analysis of interviews identified five themes: attributes of interprofessional work; collaboration, communication, and social interaction; interprofessional team innovation; shared leadership; and interpersonal relationship interface work/social. Integration of findings revealed that team member satisfaction requires participation and communication, common goals and commitment for patient-centered care, clear roles and objectives to support collaborative work, and the presence of a transformational leader to strengthen well-being, dialog, and innovation. CONCLUSIONS: Results have the potential to contribute to the planning and decision-making in the field of human resources, providing elements to promote the management of health teams and support team member satisfaction. In turn, this could lead to job permanence especially where the local health needs are more urgent.

Healthcare teams as complex adaptive systems: understanding team behaviour through team members' perception of interpersonal interaction.

BACKGROUND: Complexity science has been introduced in healthcare as a theoretical framework to better understand complex situations. Interdisciplinary healthcare teams can be viewed as Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) by focusing more on the team members' interaction with each other than on the characteristics of individual team members. Viewing teams in this way can provide us with insights into the origins of team behaviour. The aim of this study is to describe the functioning of a healthcare team as it originates from the members' interactions using the CAS principles as a framework and to explore factors influencing workplace learning as emergent behaviour. METHODS: An interview study was done with 21 palliative home-care nurses, 20 community nurses and 18 general practitioners in Flanders, Belgium. A two-step analysis consisted of a deductive approach, which uses the CAS principles as coding framework for interview transcripts, followed by an inductive approach, which identifies patterns in the codes for each CAS principle. RESULTS: All CAS principles were identified in the interview transcripts of the three groups. The most prevalent principles in our study were principles with a structuring effect on team functioning: team members act autonomously guided by internalized basic rules; attractors shape the team functioning; a team has a history and is sensitive to initial conditions; and a team is an open system, interacting with its environment. The other principles, focusing on the result of the structuring principles, were present in the data, albeit to a lesser extent: team members' interactions are non-linear; interactions between team members can produce unpredictable behaviour; and interactions between team members can generate new behaviour. Patterns, reflecting team behaviour, were recognized in the coding of each CAS principle. Patterns of team behaviour, identified in this way, were linked to interprofessional competencies of the Interprofessional Collaboration Collaborative. Factors influencing workplace learning were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides us with insights into the origin of team functioning by explaining how patterns of interactions between team members define team behaviour. Viewing healthcare teams as Complex Adaptive Systems may offer explanations of different aspects of team behaviour with implications for education, practice and research.

What a discursive understanding of interprofessional team meetings might reveal: an exploration of intellectual (learning) disability managers' performances.

Clinical and academic understandings of interprofessional working are focused mainly on individual factors such as knowledge about different professional roles, and organisational opportunities for interprofessional working (IPW). Less research has examined what happens between people at an interactional level, that is, how interprofessional working is conducted in everyday face-to-face interactions in clinical practice. The current paper proposes a discursive framework for understanding what constitutes IPW in interprofessional meetings at this interactional level. Clinical effectiveness meetings held in intellectual (learning) disability services were used as an example site for IPW. The analysis explored how agenda change points were negotiated, appropriate as agenda change points require collaboration (or agreement) between practitioners to progress to the next point The study found changes in agenda points were accomplished by practitioners conjointly through using discursive strategies including closing questions, and resources such as professional identity and laughter. The agenda provided a frame for the institutional order of the meetings, invoking a trajectory towards timely completion. However, this institutional order was at times subordinated to an 'order of concern', which seemed to enable challenges by managers to the meeting Chair and the agenda that demonstrated adherence not only to the procedural nature of the meetings, but also to the needs of service users and the services discussed. We suggest discursive strategies, resources, and both institutional orders, and order of concerns might provide a framework for developing future training and research, that is able to illuminate how IPW might be enacted in face-to-face team meetings.

Experiences of security and continuity of care: Patients' and families' narratives about the work of specialized palliative home care teams.

BACKGROUND: Those who are seriously ill and facing death are often living with physical, emotional, social, and spiritual suffering. Teamwork is considered to be necessary to holistically meet the diverse needs of patients in palliative care. Reviews of studies regarding palliative care team outcomes have concluded that teams provide benefits, especially regarding pain and symptom management. Much of the research concerning palliative care teams has been performed from the perspective of the service providers and has less often focused on patients' and families' experiences of care. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to investigate how the team's work is manifested in care episodes narrated by patients and families in specialized palliative home care (SPHC). METHOD: A total of 13 interviews were conducted with patients and families receiving specialized home care. Six patients and seven family members were recruited through SPHC team leaders. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and the transcripts qualitatively analyzed into themes. RESULTS: Two themes were constructed through thematic analysis: (1) security ("They are always available," "I get the help I need quickly"); and (2) continuity of care ("They know me/us, our whole situation and they really care"). Of the 74 care episodes, 50 were descriptions of regularly scheduled visits, while 24 related to acute care visits and/or interventions. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Patients' and family members' descriptions of the work of SPHC teams are conceptualized through experiences of security and continuity of care. Experiences of security are fostered through the 24/7 availability of the team, sensitivity and flexibility in meeting patients' and families' needs, and practical adjustments to enable care at home. Experiences of continuity of care are fostered through the team's collective approach, where the individual team member knows the patients and family members, including their whole situation, and cares about the little things in life as well as caring for the family unit.

Interprofessional Education: A Summary of Reports and Barriers to Recommendations.

PURPOSE: Effective, quality care to achieve the newly developed sustainable development goals requires the development of collaborative teams and is predicated on implementing transformative interprofessional education and on team members who are equally empowered. This is a report on The Lancet commission on transformative education for health professionals and the National Academy of Medicine's dialogues on developing and implementing innovations to enhance collaborations and to facilitate the effectiveness of healthcare teams. METHODS: Using postcolonial feminist theory for critical analysis and integrations of findings from both reports, as well as for identification of barriers to achieving equity in team functioning. FINDINGS: The global Lancet commission and the National Academy of Medicine/Institute of Medicine forum developed frameworks that could be used to educate the next generation of professionals based on identifying the local needs of communities within a global context. Recommendations included breaking down silos that exists between schools and using an equity and justice framework in developing educational programs; utilizing contemporary innovations in teaching that correspond with innovations in healthcare systems; and insuring investments in time, energy, and resources in interprofessional education. However, without addressing the silos created through professional identities and power differentials, goals of interprofessional education and collaborative practice may not be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: While a great deal has been written about interprofessional education, it is imperative for faculty in the different professional schools and for members of healthcare teams to engage in dialogues that address the fundamental and most obstinate barriers to forming equitable teams, which is the consistent narrative of medical privilege and centrism. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The dialogues about medical privilege and physician centrism in education and health care could drive the development of programmatic approaches to enhancing interprofessional education and teamwork based on justice and equity frameworks.