期刊论文详细信息
BMC Family Practice
Who is on the primary care team? Professionals’ perceptions of the conceptualization of teams and the underlying factors: a mixed-methods study
Research Article
Kirti D. Doekhie1  Mathilde M. H. Strating1  Martina Buljac-Samardzic1  Jaap Paauwe2 
[1] Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, Rotterdam, DR, The Netherlands;Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, Rotterdam, DR, The Netherlands;Department of Applied Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, Rotterdam, DR, The Netherlands;Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000, Tilburg, LE, The Netherlands;
关键词: Primary care;    Primary care professionals;    Primary care teams;    Teamwork;    Team fluidity;    Relational coordination;    Mixed-methods;   
DOI  :  10.1186/s12875-017-0685-2
 received in 2017-02-20, accepted in 2017-12-08,  发布年份 2017
来源: Springer
PDF
【 摘 要 】

BackgroundDue to the growing prevalence of elderly patients with multi-morbidity living at home, there is an increasing need for primary care professionals from different disciplinary backgrounds to collaborate as primary care teams. However, it is unclear how primary care professionals conceptualize teams and what underlying factors influence their perception of being part of a team. Our research question is: What are primary care professionals’ perceptions of teams and team membership among primary care disciplines and what factors influence their perceptions?MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study in the Dutch primary care setting. First, a survey study of 152 professionals representing 12 primary care disciplines was conducted, focusing on their perceptions of which disciplines are part of the team and the degree of relational coordination between professionals from different disciplinary backgrounds. Subsequently, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 32 professionals representing 5 primary care disciplines to gain a deeper understanding of the underlying factors influencing their perceptions and the (mis)alignment between these perceptions.ResultsMisalignments were found between perceptions regarding which disciplines are members of the team and the relational coordination between disciplines. For example, general practitioners were viewed as part of the team by helping assistants, (district) nurses, occupational therapists and geriatric specialized practice nurses, whereas the general practitioners themselves only considered geriatric specialized practice nurses to be part of their team. Professionals perceive multidisciplinary primary care teams as having multiple inner and outer layers. Three factors influence their perception of being part of a team and acting accordingly: a) knowing the people you work with, b) the necessity for knowledge exchange and c) sharing a holistic view of caregiving.ConclusionResearch and practice should take into account the misalignment between primary care professionals’ perceptions of primary care teams, as our study notes variations in the conceptualization of primary care teams. To enhance teamwork between professionals from different disciplinary backgrounds, professionals acknowledge the importance of three underlying conditions: team familiarity, regular and structured knowledge exchange between all professionals involved in the care process and realizing and believing in the added value for patients of working as a team.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202311108545229ZK.pdf 609KB PDF download
【 参考文献 】
  • [1]
  • [2]
  • [3]
  • [4]
  • [5]
  • [6]
  • [7]
  • [8]
  • [9]
  • [10]
  • [11]
  • [12]
  • [13]
  • [14]
  • [15]
  • [16]
  • [17]
  • [18]
  • [19]
  • [20]
  • [21]
  • [22]
  • [23]
  • [24]
  • [25]
  • [26]
  • [27]
  • [28]
  • [29]
  • [30]
  • [31]
  • [32]
  • [33]
  • [34]
  • [35]
  • [36]
  • [37]
  • [38]
  • [39]
  • [40]
  • [41]
  • [42]
  • [43]
  • [44]
  • [45]
  • [46]
  • [47]
  • [48]
  • [49]
  • [50]
  • [51]
  • [52]
  • [53]
  • [54]
  • [55]
  • [56]
  • [57]
  • [58]
  • [59]
  • [60]
  • [61]
  • [62]
  • [63]
  • [64]
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:0次 浏览次数:0次