跨专业医疗团队中的领导力和追随者动力:主治医生的观点。

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Academic Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-22 DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000005819
Erin S Barry, Pim Teunissen, Lara Varpio, Robert Vietor, Michelle Kiger
{"title":"跨专业医疗团队中的领导力和追随者动力:主治医生的观点。","authors":"Erin S Barry, Pim Teunissen, Lara Varpio, Robert Vietor, Michelle Kiger","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Effective interprofessional health care team (IHT) members collaborate to reduce medical errors, use resources effectively, and improve patient outcomes, making interprofessional collaboration imperative. Because physicians are often designated as the positional leaders of IHTs, understanding their perspectives on collaboration within IHTs could help to mitigate the disconnects between what is suggested in theory and what is happening in practice. This study aimed to explore leader-follower dynamics within medical teams that are commonly working in clinical care contexts.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using a constructivist approach, the authors conducted 12 individual, semistructured interviews from November 2022 to September 2023 with attending physicians who have led IHTs in perioperative (i.e., preoperative clinic, operating room, postoperative and recovery unit) or emergency department settings. The transcripts were analyzed from December 2022 to December 2023 using inductive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three themes explained the physician perceptions of IHT leadership-followership dynamics: (1) physicians are comfortable sharing leadership intra professionally, (2) the clinical culture and environment constrain interprofessional followership and shared leadership, and (3) hierarchical models hold true even while active followers are appreciated, when appropriate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The data in this study suggest that, in perioperative and emergency department settings, shared leadership largely may not occur inter professionally but occurs intra professionally. Participants suggested that the clinical culture and environment (i.e., legal concerns, hierarchical assumption, patient care ownership responsibilities) constrained interprofessional followership and shared leadership. On the basis of the study's findings and how they align with previous research, future research into interprofessional collaboration and followership roles should focus on what factors enable and constrain active followership and shared leadership. Such collaboration can only be achieved when active followership and shared leadership are allowed and promoted. These findings and others suggest that not all contexts are enabling such types of interprofessional collaboration due to legal concerns, hierarchical traditions, and patient ownership considerations.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1208-1214"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leadership and Followership Dynamics in Interprofessional Health Care Teams: Attending Physician Perspectives.\",\"authors\":\"Erin S Barry, Pim Teunissen, Lara Varpio, Robert Vietor, Michelle Kiger\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Effective interprofessional health care team (IHT) members collaborate to reduce medical errors, use resources effectively, and improve patient outcomes, making interprofessional collaboration imperative. Because physicians are often designated as the positional leaders of IHTs, understanding their perspectives on collaboration within IHTs could help to mitigate the disconnects between what is suggested in theory and what is happening in practice. This study aimed to explore leader-follower dynamics within medical teams that are commonly working in clinical care contexts.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using a constructivist approach, the authors conducted 12 individual, semistructured interviews from November 2022 to September 2023 with attending physicians who have led IHTs in perioperative (i.e., preoperative clinic, operating room, postoperative and recovery unit) or emergency department settings. The transcripts were analyzed from December 2022 to December 2023 using inductive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three themes explained the physician perceptions of IHT leadership-followership dynamics: (1) physicians are comfortable sharing leadership intra professionally, (2) the clinical culture and environment constrain interprofessional followership and shared leadership, and (3) hierarchical models hold true even while active followers are appreciated, when appropriate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The data in this study suggest that, in perioperative and emergency department settings, shared leadership largely may not occur inter professionally but occurs intra professionally. Participants suggested that the clinical culture and environment (i.e., legal concerns, hierarchical assumption, patient care ownership responsibilities) constrained interprofessional followership and shared leadership. On the basis of the study's findings and how they align with previous research, future research into interprofessional collaboration and followership roles should focus on what factors enable and constrain active followership and shared leadership. Such collaboration can only be achieved when active followership and shared leadership are allowed and promoted. These findings and others suggest that not all contexts are enabling such types of interprofessional collaboration due to legal concerns, hierarchical traditions, and patient ownership considerations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1208-1214\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005819\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005819","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:有效的跨专业医疗团队(IHT)成员合作可以减少医疗失误、有效利用资源并改善患者预后,因此跨专业合作势在必行。由于医生通常被指定为跨专业医护团队的职位领导者,了解他们对跨专业医护团队内部协作的看法有助于减少理论建议与实际情况之间的脱节。本研究旨在探讨通常在临床护理环境中工作的医疗团队中领导者与追随者之间的动态关系:作者采用建构主义方法,于 2022 年 11 月至 2023 年 9 月对曾在围手术期(即术前门诊、手术室、术后和恢复室)或急诊科环境中领导过 IHT 的主治医师进行了 12 次个人半结构化访谈。在 2022 年 12 月至 2023 年 12 月期间,采用归纳式主题分析法对笔录进行了分析:有三个主题解释了医生对 IHT 领导力-追随者动态的看法:(1)医生乐于在专业内分享领导力;(2)临床文化和环境限制了专业间的追随者和分享领导力;(3)即使在适当的情况下积极追随者也会受到赞赏,但等级模式仍然适用:本研究的数据表明,在围手术期和急诊科环境中,共同领导在很大程度上可能不是发生在专业间,而是发生在专业内。参与者认为,临床文化和环境(即法律问题、等级假设、患者护理责任)限制了专业间的追随和共同领导。根据本研究的结果以及这些结果与以往研究的一致性,未来对跨专业合作和追随者角色的研究应重点关注哪些因素促成和制约了积极的追随者和共同领导。只有在允许和促进积极追随和共同领导的情况下,才能实现这种合作。这些研究结果和其他研究结果表明,由于法律问题、等级传统和患者自主权等方面的考虑,并非所有情况下都能实现这种类型的跨专业合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Leadership and Followership Dynamics in Interprofessional Health Care Teams: Attending Physician Perspectives.

Purpose: Effective interprofessional health care team (IHT) members collaborate to reduce medical errors, use resources effectively, and improve patient outcomes, making interprofessional collaboration imperative. Because physicians are often designated as the positional leaders of IHTs, understanding their perspectives on collaboration within IHTs could help to mitigate the disconnects between what is suggested in theory and what is happening in practice. This study aimed to explore leader-follower dynamics within medical teams that are commonly working in clinical care contexts.

Method: Using a constructivist approach, the authors conducted 12 individual, semistructured interviews from November 2022 to September 2023 with attending physicians who have led IHTs in perioperative (i.e., preoperative clinic, operating room, postoperative and recovery unit) or emergency department settings. The transcripts were analyzed from December 2022 to December 2023 using inductive thematic analysis.

Results: Three themes explained the physician perceptions of IHT leadership-followership dynamics: (1) physicians are comfortable sharing leadership intra professionally, (2) the clinical culture and environment constrain interprofessional followership and shared leadership, and (3) hierarchical models hold true even while active followers are appreciated, when appropriate.

Conclusions: The data in this study suggest that, in perioperative and emergency department settings, shared leadership largely may not occur inter professionally but occurs intra professionally. Participants suggested that the clinical culture and environment (i.e., legal concerns, hierarchical assumption, patient care ownership responsibilities) constrained interprofessional followership and shared leadership. On the basis of the study's findings and how they align with previous research, future research into interprofessional collaboration and followership roles should focus on what factors enable and constrain active followership and shared leadership. Such collaboration can only be achieved when active followership and shared leadership are allowed and promoted. These findings and others suggest that not all contexts are enabling such types of interprofessional collaboration due to legal concerns, hierarchical traditions, and patient ownership considerations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
期刊最新文献
Validating the 2023 Association of American Medical Colleges Graduate Medical Education Leadership Competencies. World Federation for Medical Education Recognizes 5 International Accrediting Bodies. Irony. Teaching Opportunities for Postgraduate Trainees in Primary Care. How Many Is Too Many? Using Cognitive Load Theory to Determine the Maximum Safe Number of Inpatient Consultations for Trainees.
×
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