Professional differences in interprofessional working.

Academic Unit of Child Health, University of Sheffield, PGME Stephenson Unit, Western Bank, Sheffield, UK.
Journal of Interprofessional Care (Impact Factor: 1.48). 07/2008; 22(3):239-51. DOI: 10.1080/13561820802054655
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT UK government policy is encouraging healthcare staff to blur traditional roles, in the drive to increase joint working between practitioners. However, there is currently a lack of clarity regarding the impact that changes to traditional working practice might have on staff delivering the services, or on patient care. In this article, we report findings from three qualitative case studies examining interprofessional practice in stroke care, in which the influence of professional differences emerged as a significant theme. We draw on findings from individual semi-structured interviews, as well as fieldwork observations, to describe the influence of professional knowledge and skills, role and identity, and power and status considerations in interprofessional working. The insights that were gained contribute to the understanding of how professional differences impact on healthcare staff joint working, and suggest that the elements identified need to be fully considered in drives towards changed working practice.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To explore the experiences of governance and incentives during organizational change for managers and clinical staff. Three primary care settings in England in 2006-2008. Data collection involved three group interviews with 32 service users, individual interviews with 32 managers, and 56 frontline professionals in three sites. The Realistic Evaluation framework was used in analysis to examine the effects of new policies and their implementation. Integrating new interprofessional teams to work effectively is a slow process, especially if structures in place do not acknowledge the painful feelings involved in change and do not support staff during periods of uncertainty. Eliciting multiple perspectives, often dependent on individual occupational positioning or place in new team configurations, illuminates the need to incorporate the emotional as well as technocratic and system factors when implementing change. Some suggestions are made for facilitating change in health care systems. These are discussed in the context of similar health care reform initiatives in the United States.
    Health Services Research 07/2013; · 2.29 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Many institutions have invested considerably in the provision of student facilities - lecture halls, tutorial rooms and classrooms - spaces we call collectively learning environments. In expending resources on such facilities, we have assumed that we have needed to create this range of spaces for such activities. However, how do we know we have invested wisely in support of learning for interprofessional care? In this article I review the literature to identify evidence in a range of fields, including health care, to consider the issues and difficulties of employing established approaches from practices of evidence-based design. Central in this article is the role of evidence in the assessment of learning environments. In particular, I argue that the evidence must include qualitative dimensions of the learning experience. To address the qualitative outcomes from education, with particular attention to the concerns of interprofessional education, a model is proposed to examine different levels of outcomes. By developing an interpretation of Kirkpatrick's model, four levels are described for the effective evaluation of interprofessional learning environments.
    Journal of Interprofessional Care 09/2013; 27 Suppl 2:31-6. · 1.48 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract For almost half a century, research has identified that effective teamwork is essential in order to enhance care provision and health outcomes for patients. Although the value of teamwork is well-recognized in healthcare, the historically rooted dynamics of workplace relationships create a myriad of challenges to creating collaborative teams. Understanding the history of interpersonal dynamics between health professionals can provide direction for future interprofessional education and collaboration strategies. The aim of this paper is to provide a historical overview of the social positioning of nursing and medicine in the context of interprofessional collaboration. Few professions work as closely as nursing and medicine. Despite the well-recognized benefits of interprofessional collaboration, these two professions are often socially positioned in opposition to one another and depicted as adversarial. This analysis will seek to advance our understanding of the historical roots between these two professions and their relationships with and among each other in relation to career choice, early socialization and patient care delivery. An exploration of the historical social positioning of nursing and medicine can provide an enhanced understanding of the barriers to interprofessional collaboration and inform future successes in interprofessional education and practice among all health and social care professions.
    Journal of Interprofessional Care 01/2014; · 1.48 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jul 22, 2014