From Model to Everyday Practice: A Qualitative Observational Study of Daily Fact Team Board Meetings.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES International Journal of Integrated Care Pub Date : 2023-10-10 eCollection Date: 2023-10-01 DOI:10.5334/ijic.7555
Ingunn Myraunet, Anita Strøm, Heidi Moen Gjersøe
{"title":"From Model to Everyday Practice: A Qualitative Observational Study of Daily Fact Team Board Meetings.","authors":"Ingunn Myraunet,&nbsp;Anita Strøm,&nbsp;Heidi Moen Gjersøe","doi":"10.5334/ijic.7555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) model has rapidly become a way of organising services for people with severe mental illness. FACT describes the integrated approach of interprofessional teams.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A qualitative study of interprofessional collaboration in three FACT teams was conducted. Thirty observations of the teams' board meetings were conducted, and field notes were thematically analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study generated three themes in interprofessional collaboration in FACT teams. The first theme reflects the challenges of working in line with the model, the second suggests an unclear understanding of a shared caseload, and the third shows different approaches to working with a shared caseload.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The themes suggest that there is increased opportunity for the shared caseload in the FACT team board meeting. The findings reflect that there is a lack of either the resources necessary for working with a shared caseload or an understanding of the intention of a shared caseload.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The potential of the shared caseload in FACT team board meetings are dependent on sufficient resources and a collective understanding of the FACT model and the shared caseload among professionals. Further research on how a shared caseload is experienced and facilitated in FACT teams can provide insight into their practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":14049,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Integrated Care","volume":"23 4","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10573559/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Integrated Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.7555","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) model has rapidly become a way of organising services for people with severe mental illness. FACT describes the integrated approach of interprofessional teams.

Method: A qualitative study of interprofessional collaboration in three FACT teams was conducted. Thirty observations of the teams' board meetings were conducted, and field notes were thematically analysed.

Results: This study generated three themes in interprofessional collaboration in FACT teams. The first theme reflects the challenges of working in line with the model, the second suggests an unclear understanding of a shared caseload, and the third shows different approaches to working with a shared caseload.

Discussion: The themes suggest that there is increased opportunity for the shared caseload in the FACT team board meeting. The findings reflect that there is a lack of either the resources necessary for working with a shared caseload or an understanding of the intention of a shared caseload.

Conclusion: The potential of the shared caseload in FACT team board meetings are dependent on sufficient resources and a collective understanding of the FACT model and the shared caseload among professionals. Further research on how a shared caseload is experienced and facilitated in FACT teams can provide insight into their practices.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从模式到日常实践:对日常事实小组董事会会议的定性观察研究。
引言:灵活自信的社区治疗(FACT)模式已迅速成为为严重精神疾病患者组织服务的一种方式。FACT描述了跨专业团队的综合方法。方法:对三个FACT团队的跨专业合作进行了定性研究。对小组的董事会会议进行了30次观察,并对实地说明进行了专题分析。结果:这项研究在FACT团队的跨专业合作中产生了三个主题。第一个主题反映了按照该模式工作的挑战,第二个主题表明对共享案件量的理解不清楚,第三个主题显示了处理共享案件量时的不同方法。讨论:这些主题表明,在FACT小组董事会会议上,共享案件数量的机会增加了。调查结果表明,既缺乏处理共同案件所需的资源,也缺乏对共同案件意图的理解。结论:FACT小组董事会会议上共享案件量的潜力取决于充足的资源以及对FACT模式和专业人员共享案件量之间的集体理解。进一步研究FACT团队如何体验和促进共享案件量,可以深入了解他们的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Integrated Care
International Journal of Integrated Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
887
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Established in 2000, IJIC’s mission is to promote integrated care as a scientific discipline. IJIC’s primary purpose is to examine critically the policy and practice of integrated care and whether and how this has impacted on quality-of-care, user experiences, and cost-effectiveness. The journal regularly publishes conference supplements and special themed editions. To find out more contact Managing Editor, Susan Royer. The Journal is supported by the International Foundation for Integrated Care (IFIC).
期刊最新文献
Lessons Learned From the Implementation of an Integrated Health and Social Care Child and Family Hub - a Case Study. Examining Macro-Level Barriers and Facilitators to Scaling Up Integrated Care from a Complexity Perspective: A Multi-Case Study of Cambodia, Slovenia, and Belgium. Process Evaluations for the Scale-Up of Complex Interventions - a Scoping Review. Cost of "Ideal Minimum Integrated Care" for Type 2 Diabetes and Hypertension Patients in Cambodia Context: Provider Perspective. Addressing Child and Adolescent Mental Health Problems in the Community. Evaluation of a Consultation and Advise Team for Assessment, Support and Referral.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1