如何使协同规划过程工作的探索-一个有根据的理论研究

Ingela Jobe, Å. Engström, Birgitta Lindberg
{"title":"如何使协同规划过程工作的探索-一个有根据的理论研究","authors":"Ingela Jobe, Å. Engström, Birgitta Lindberg","doi":"10.1080/2331205X.2021.1896426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Abstract: The integration of healthcare and social services has made collaborative care plans an important tool for health and social care professionals and the person involved. The collaborative planning process is challenging, and studies have revealed that its implementation and outcomes are not satisfactory for all participants. The study aimed to explore the collaborative planning process and attributes contributing to making the process work for all participants. The study focused on older adults in need of a collaborative care plan and adopted a grounded theory approach. Several sources were used to collect data from participants. The findings revealed an overarching process and two sub-processes. The overarching process “holding the links together” described the identified core attributes, joint philosophy, everyday practice and planning through partnership. The two sub-processes, “the missing link” and “connecting the links”, described the participants’ perspectives. The conceptual model explained the identified attributes and the connections between the overarching process and the two sub-processes. The study confirmed the complexity of collaboration between actors, professionals, older adults and informal caregivers. When one or more attribute did not function optimally or was missing, it affected the collaborative care planning process and participants involved, with consequences for the older adult. A joint philosophy, an ethic, could facilitate and guide professionals in everyday practice through all steps of the collaborative care planning process and contribute in making the process successful.","PeriodicalId":10470,"journal":{"name":"Cogent Medicine","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploration of how to make the collaborative planning process work - a grounded theory study\",\"authors\":\"Ingela Jobe, Å. Engström, Birgitta Lindberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2331205X.2021.1896426\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Abstract: The integration of healthcare and social services has made collaborative care plans an important tool for health and social care professionals and the person involved. The collaborative planning process is challenging, and studies have revealed that its implementation and outcomes are not satisfactory for all participants. The study aimed to explore the collaborative planning process and attributes contributing to making the process work for all participants. The study focused on older adults in need of a collaborative care plan and adopted a grounded theory approach. Several sources were used to collect data from participants. The findings revealed an overarching process and two sub-processes. The overarching process “holding the links together” described the identified core attributes, joint philosophy, everyday practice and planning through partnership. The two sub-processes, “the missing link” and “connecting the links”, described the participants’ perspectives. The conceptual model explained the identified attributes and the connections between the overarching process and the two sub-processes. The study confirmed the complexity of collaboration between actors, professionals, older adults and informal caregivers. When one or more attribute did not function optimally or was missing, it affected the collaborative care planning process and participants involved, with consequences for the older adult. A joint philosophy, an ethic, could facilitate and guide professionals in everyday practice through all steps of the collaborative care planning process and contribute in making the process successful.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10470,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cogent Medicine\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cogent Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2331205X.2021.1896426\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cogent Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2331205X.2021.1896426","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要摘要:医疗卫生与社会服务的融合使协同护理计划成为卫生与社会护理专业人员和相关人员的重要工具。协作规划过程是具有挑战性的,研究表明,它的实施和结果并不是所有参与者都满意的。本研究旨在探讨协同规划过程和有助于使该过程为所有参与者工作的属性。本研究以需要合作护理计划的老年人为研究对象,采用了扎根理论的方法。使用了几个来源来收集参与者的数据。研究结果揭示了一个总体过程和两个子过程。“将联系联系在一起”的总体过程描述了确定的核心属性、共同理念、日常实践和通过伙伴关系进行的规划。“缺失环节”和“连接环节”这两个子过程描述了参与者的观点。概念模型解释了已识别的属性以及总体过程和两个子过程之间的联系。这项研究证实了演员、专业人士、老年人和非正式照顾者之间合作的复杂性。当一个或多个属性没有发挥最佳作用或缺失时,它会影响协作护理计划过程和参与者,并对老年人产生后果。一种共同的理念,一种道德,可以促进和指导专业人员在日常实践中通过协作护理计划过程的所有步骤,并有助于使该过程成功。
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
Exploration of how to make the collaborative planning process work - a grounded theory study
Abstract Abstract: The integration of healthcare and social services has made collaborative care plans an important tool for health and social care professionals and the person involved. The collaborative planning process is challenging, and studies have revealed that its implementation and outcomes are not satisfactory for all participants. The study aimed to explore the collaborative planning process and attributes contributing to making the process work for all participants. The study focused on older adults in need of a collaborative care plan and adopted a grounded theory approach. Several sources were used to collect data from participants. The findings revealed an overarching process and two sub-processes. The overarching process “holding the links together” described the identified core attributes, joint philosophy, everyday practice and planning through partnership. The two sub-processes, “the missing link” and “connecting the links”, described the participants’ perspectives. The conceptual model explained the identified attributes and the connections between the overarching process and the two sub-processes. The study confirmed the complexity of collaboration between actors, professionals, older adults and informal caregivers. When one or more attribute did not function optimally or was missing, it affected the collaborative care planning process and participants involved, with consequences for the older adult. A joint philosophy, an ethic, could facilitate and guide professionals in everyday practice through all steps of the collaborative care planning process and contribute in making the process successful.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Factors associated with uptake of community client-led ART delivery model at Mulago adult HIV clinic _ Mulago National Referral Hospital Malaria interventions and control programes in Sub-Saharan Africa: A narrative review Quantitative assessment of specific serum IgGs may verify source of environmental exposure in extrinsic allergic alveolitis (EAA) Divergence in fertility levels and patterns of muslim-majority countries of maghreb and middle/West Africa Exploration of how to make the collaborative planning process work - a grounded theory study
×
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