探索跨学科团队合作以支持有效查房。

IF 1 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE QUALITY ASSURANCE Pub Date : 2020-07-14 DOI:10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2019-0178
Victoria Walton, Anne Hogden, Janet C Long, Julie Johnson, David Greenfield
{"title":"探索跨学科团队合作以支持有效查房。","authors":"Victoria Walton,&nbsp;Anne Hogden,&nbsp;Janet C Long,&nbsp;Julie Johnson,&nbsp;David Greenfield","doi":"10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2019-0178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This paper aims to explore if health professionals share understanding of teamwork that supports collaborative ward rounds.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>A purpose-designed survey was conducted in two acute medical and two rehabilitation wards from a metropolitan teaching hospital. Medical officers, nurses and allied health professionals participated. To understand characteristics that support collaborative ward rounds, questions developed from literature and industry experience asked: what are the enablers and challenges to teamwork; and what are clinicians' experiences of positive teamwork? Descriptive and thematic analyses were applied to the dimensions of effective teamwork as a framework for deductive coding.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Seventy-seven clinicians participated (93% response rate). Findings aligned with dimensions of teamwork framework. There was no meaningful difference between clinicians or specialty. Enablers to teamwork were: effective communication, shared understanding of patient goals, and colleague's roles. Challenges were ineffective communication, individual personalities, lack of understanding about roles and responsibilities, and organisational structure. Additional challenges included: time; uncoordinated treatment planning; and leadership. Positive teamwork was influenced by leadership and team dynamics.</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>Ward rounds benefit from a foundation of collaborative teamwork. Different dimensions of teamwork present during ward rounds support clinicians' shared understanding of roles, expectations and communication.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>Rounds such as structured rounding, aim to improve teamwork. Inverting this concept to first develop effective collaboration will support team adaptability and resilience. This enables teams to transition between the multiple rounding processes undertaken in a single ward. The emphasis becomes high-quality teamwork rather than a single rounding process.</p>","PeriodicalId":47455,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE QUALITY ASSURANCE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2019-0178","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring interdisciplinary teamwork to support effective ward rounds.\",\"authors\":\"Victoria Walton,&nbsp;Anne Hogden,&nbsp;Janet C Long,&nbsp;Julie Johnson,&nbsp;David Greenfield\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2019-0178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This paper aims to explore if health professionals share understanding of teamwork that supports collaborative ward rounds.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>A purpose-designed survey was conducted in two acute medical and two rehabilitation wards from a metropolitan teaching hospital. Medical officers, nurses and allied health professionals participated. To understand characteristics that support collaborative ward rounds, questions developed from literature and industry experience asked: what are the enablers and challenges to teamwork; and what are clinicians' experiences of positive teamwork? Descriptive and thematic analyses were applied to the dimensions of effective teamwork as a framework for deductive coding.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Seventy-seven clinicians participated (93% response rate). Findings aligned with dimensions of teamwork framework. There was no meaningful difference between clinicians or specialty. Enablers to teamwork were: effective communication, shared understanding of patient goals, and colleague's roles. Challenges were ineffective communication, individual personalities, lack of understanding about roles and responsibilities, and organisational structure. Additional challenges included: time; uncoordinated treatment planning; and leadership. Positive teamwork was influenced by leadership and team dynamics.</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>Ward rounds benefit from a foundation of collaborative teamwork. Different dimensions of teamwork present during ward rounds support clinicians' shared understanding of roles, expectations and communication.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>Rounds such as structured rounding, aim to improve teamwork. Inverting this concept to first develop effective collaboration will support team adaptability and resilience. This enables teams to transition between the multiple rounding processes undertaken in a single ward. The emphasis becomes high-quality teamwork rather than a single rounding process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE QUALITY ASSURANCE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2019-0178\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE QUALITY ASSURANCE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2019-0178\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE QUALITY ASSURANCE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2019-0178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

目的:本文旨在探讨卫生专业人员是否对支持协作查房的团队合作有共同的理解。设计/方法/方法:在一家大都市教学医院的两个急症病房和两个康复病房进行了一项有目的的调查。医务人员、护士和专职保健专业人员参加了调查。为了理解支持协作查房的特征,我们从文献和行业经验中提出了以下问题:团队合作的推动因素和挑战是什么?临床医生对积极的团队合作有什么经验?描述性和专题分析被应用于作为演绎编码框架的有效团队合作的维度。结果:77名临床医生参与,有效率93%。研究结果与团队合作框架的维度一致。临床医生或专业之间没有显著差异。团队合作的促成因素是:有效的沟通,对患者目标的共同理解,以及同事的角色。挑战是无效的沟通,个性,缺乏对角色和责任的理解,以及组织结构。其他挑战包括:时间;治疗计划不协调;和领导能力。积极的团队合作受到领导和团队动力的影响。实际意义:查房受益于协作团队的基础。查房期间出现的不同团队合作维度支持临床医生对角色、期望和沟通的共同理解。独创性/价值:例如结构化的round round,旨在提高团队合作。将这一概念反过来,首先发展有效的协作将支持团队的适应性和弹性。这使团队能够在单个病房内进行的多个轮询过程之间进行转换。重点是高质量的团队合作,而不是单一的循环过程。
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
Exploring interdisciplinary teamwork to support effective ward rounds.

Purpose: This paper aims to explore if health professionals share understanding of teamwork that supports collaborative ward rounds.

Design/methodology/approach: A purpose-designed survey was conducted in two acute medical and two rehabilitation wards from a metropolitan teaching hospital. Medical officers, nurses and allied health professionals participated. To understand characteristics that support collaborative ward rounds, questions developed from literature and industry experience asked: what are the enablers and challenges to teamwork; and what are clinicians' experiences of positive teamwork? Descriptive and thematic analyses were applied to the dimensions of effective teamwork as a framework for deductive coding.

Findings: Seventy-seven clinicians participated (93% response rate). Findings aligned with dimensions of teamwork framework. There was no meaningful difference between clinicians or specialty. Enablers to teamwork were: effective communication, shared understanding of patient goals, and colleague's roles. Challenges were ineffective communication, individual personalities, lack of understanding about roles and responsibilities, and organisational structure. Additional challenges included: time; uncoordinated treatment planning; and leadership. Positive teamwork was influenced by leadership and team dynamics.

Practical implications: Ward rounds benefit from a foundation of collaborative teamwork. Different dimensions of teamwork present during ward rounds support clinicians' shared understanding of roles, expectations and communication.

Originality/value: Rounds such as structured rounding, aim to improve teamwork. Inverting this concept to first develop effective collaboration will support team adaptability and resilience. This enables teams to transition between the multiple rounding processes undertaken in a single ward. The emphasis becomes high-quality teamwork rather than a single rounding process.

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
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: ■Successful quality/continuous improvement projects ■The use of quality tools and models in leadership management development such as the EFQM Excellence Model, Balanced Scorecard, Quality Standards, Managed Care ■Issues relating to process control such as Six Sigma, Leadership, Managing Change and Process Mapping ■Improving patient care through quality related programmes and/or research Articles that use quantitative and qualitative methods are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
A cross-organizational Lean deployment in an Italian regional healthcare system. The mediating effect of patient trust on the relationship between service quality and patient satisfaction. Evaluating patient and medical staff satisfaction from doctor-patient communication. Lean six sigma and stroke in rural hospital - The case of Baruch Padeh Medical Center. Examining the behavioural intention of inpatients in Indian government hospitals.
×
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