Explore the vast range of titles available.

This paper introduces the construct of leader inclusiveness-words and deeds exhibited by leaders that invite and appreciate others' contributions. We propose that leader inclusiveness helps cross-disciplinary teams overcome the inhibiting effects of status differences, allowing members to collaborate in process improvement. The existence of a professional hierarchy in medicine and the differential status accorded to those in different disciplines is well established in the health care literature, as is the need for quality improvement. We build on this foundation to suggest that profession-derived status is positively associated with psychological safety (H1)-a key antecedent of speaking up and learning behavior-in health care teams. We hypothesize that this effect varies across teams (H2), and furthermore, that leader inclusiveness predicts psychological safety (H3) and moderates the relationship between status and psychological safety (H4). Finally, we suggest psychological safety predicts engagement in quality improvement work (H5) and mediates the relationship between leader inclusiveness and engagement (H6). Survey data collected in 23 neonatal intensive care units involved in quality improvement projects support our hypotheses. These results provide insight into antecedents of and strategies for fostering improvement efforts in health care and other sectors in which cross-disciplinary teams engage in collaborative learning to improve products or services.

Background Interdisciplinary team work is increasingly prevalent, supported by policies and practices that bring care closer to the patient and challenge traditional professional boundaries. To date, there has been a great deal of emphasis on the processes of team work, and in some cases, outcomes. Method This study draws on two sources of knowledge to identify the attributes of a good interdisciplinary team; a published systematic review of the literature on interdisciplinary team work, and the perceptions of over 253 staff from 11 community rehabilitation and intermediate care teams in the UK. These data sources were merged using qualitative content analysis to arrive at a framework that identifies characteristics and proposes ten competencies that support effective interdisciplinary team work. Results Ten characteristics underpinning effective interdisciplinary team work were identified: positive leadership and management attributes; communication strategies and structures; personal rewards, training and development; appropriate resources and procedures; appropriate skill mix; supportive team climate; individual characteristics that support interdisciplinary team work; clarity of vision; quality and outcomes of care; and respecting and understanding roles. Conclusions We propose competency statements that an effective interdisciplinary team functioning at a high level should demonstrate.

Cancer care is increasingly delivered by multidisciplinary teams. Cath Taylor and colleagues argue that stronger evidence is needed of their effectiveness

Context: In response to national efforts to improve quality of care, policymakers and health care leaders have increasingly turned to quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) as an efficient approach to improving provider practices and patient outcomes through the dissemination of evidence-based practices. This article presents findings from a systematic review of the literature on QICs, focusing on the identification of common components of QICs in health care and exploring, when possible, relations between QIC components and outcomes at the patient or provider level. Methods: A systematic search of five major health care databases generated 294 unique articles, twenty-four of which met our criteria for inclusion in our final analysis. These articles pertained to either randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies with comparison groups, and they reported the findings from twenty different studies of QICs in health care. We coded the articles to identify the components reported for each collaborative. Findings: We found fourteen crosscutting components as common ingredients in health care QICs (e.g., in-person learning sessions, phone meetings, data reporting, leadership involvement, and training in QI methods). The collaboratives reported included, on average, six to seven of these components. The most common were in-person learning sessions, plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles, multidisciplinary QI teams, and data collection for QI. The outcomes data from these studies indicate the greatest impact of QICs at the provider level; patient-level findings were less robust. Conclusions: Reporting on specific components of the collaborative was imprecise across articles, rendering it impossible to identify active QIC ingredients linked to improved care. Although QICs appear to have some promise in improving the process of care, there is great need for further controlled research examining the core components of these collaboratives related to patient- and provider-level outcomes.

Objective: To compare multi- and interdisciplinary team approaches concerning team process (teamwork) and team effectiveness (team performance and staff satisfaction) in German medical rehabilitation clinics. Design: A cross-sectional study with a descriptive—explorative design. Setting: Eighteen medical rehabilitation clinics divided into two groups (somatic and psychosomatic indication fields). Subjects: The 18 head physicians or psychotherapists in the clinics and their complete rehabilitation teams (n = 824). Main measures: An interview guide was designed to determine the team approach in a telephone interview. A staff questionnaire for team members measured teamwork and team effectiveness with psychometrically validated questionnaires and self-administered items. Results: All 18 head physicians took part in the telephone interview. The response rate of the employee attitude survey averaged 46% (n = 378). Eight teams were categorized as multidisciplinary and seven teams as interdisciplinary. In three cases the results were ambiguous. These teams were not considered in the further study. As expected, the interdisciplinary team approach showed significantly better results for nearly all aspects of teamwork and team effectiveness in comparison with the multidisciplinary team approach. The differences between multi- and interdisciplinary approach concerning teamwork and team effectiveness were higher in the somatic (8 teams, n = 183) than in the psychosomatic indication fields (7 teams, n = 195). Conclusions: Teamwork and team effectiveness are higher in teams working with the interdisciplinary team approach. Therefore the interdisciplinary approach can be recommended, particularly for clinics in the somatic indication field. Team development can help to move from the multidisciplinary to the interdisciplinary approach.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to contextualize the concepts of “service co-production” and “value co-creation” to health care services, challenging the traditional bio-medical model which focusses on illness treatment and neglects the role played by patients in the provision of care. Design/methodology/approach – For this purpose, the author conducted a systematic review, which paved the way for the identification of the concept of “health care co-production” and allowed to discuss its effects and implications. Starting from a database of 254 records, 65 papers have been included in systematic review and informed the development of this paper. Findings – Co-production of health care services implies the establishment of co-creating partnerships between health care professionals and patients, which are aimed at mobilizing the dormant resources of the latter. However, several barriers prevent the full implementation of health care co-production, nurturing the application of the traditional bio-medical model. Practical implications – Co-production of health care is difficult to realize, due to both health care professionals’ hostility and patients unwillingness to be involved in the provision of care. Nonetheless, the scientific literature is consistent in claiming that co-production of care paves the way for increased health outcomes, enhanced patient satisfaction, better service innovation, and cost savings. The establishment of multi-disciplinary health care teams, the improvement of patient-provider communication, and the enhancement of the use of ICTs for the purpose of value co-creation are crucial ingredients in the recipe for increased patient engagement. Originality/value – To the knowledge of the author, this is the first paper aimed at systematizing the scientific literature in the field of health care co-production. The originality of this paper stems from its twofold relevance: on the one hand, it emphasizes the pros and the cons of health care co-production and, on the other hand, it provides with insightful directions to deal with the engagement of patients in value co-creation.

A report from the Interprofessional Education Collaborative and another from the Institute of Medicine cite working as part of interdisciplinary teams as a core proficiency area for improving health care. This article discusses the core competencies of interprofessional education and the essential role for social workers as leaders and facilitators of this practice. Educators will learn how to help students discover the knowledge, skills, and attitudes for successful interprofessional work. Specifically, this article has the following objectives: Discuss essential elements of effective interprofessional practice; Present exemplars of interprofessional education involving social work; Identify the roles for social work in leadership, education, and practice in interprofessional education.

This study explores how peer support providers’ roles are defined and integrated in inter-professional mental health care teams, and how these providers relate to other practitioners and clients. Interviews were conducted with peer support providers in two different formal models of peer support employment. Qualitative data analysis was undertaken. The findings indicate that: peer support providers experience ambiguity and that some ambiguity may offer benefits; peer support providers enhance team acceptance of their role through several means and strategies; setting boundaries with clients is a delicate issue that requires several considerations that we discuss.

The following case study aims to explore management's, health professionals' and patients' experiences on the extent to which there is visibility of management support in achieving effective interdisciplinary team working, which is explicitly declared in the mission statement of a 60-bed acute rehabilitative geriatric hospital in Malta. A total of 21 semi-structured interviews were conducted with the above-mentioned key stakeholders. Three main distinct yet interdependent themes emerged as a result of thematic analysis: \"managing a team-friendly hospital\", \"interdisciplinary team components\", and \"interdisciplinary team processes\". The findings show that visibility of management support and its alignment with the process and content levels of interdisciplinary teamwork are key to integrated care for acute rehabilitative geriatric patients. The emerging phenomena may not be reproducible in a different context; although many of the emerging themes could be comfortably matched with the existing literature. The implications are geared towards raising the consciousness and conscientiousness of good practice in interdisciplinary teamwork in hospitals, as well as in emphasizing organizational and management support as crucial factors for team-based organizations. Interdisciplinary teamwork in acute rehabilitative geriatrics provides optimal quality and integrated health care delivery with the aim that the older persons are successfully discharged back to the community. The authors draw on solid theoretical frameworks--the complexity theory, team effectiveness model and the social identity theory--to support their major finding, namely the alignment of organizational and management support with intra-team factors at the process and content level.

Objective This study aimed to qualitatively explore the experiences of healthcare professionals implementing changes (as change initiators) and operationalizing interdisciplinary teamwork in a rehabilitation service within the Irish healthcare system. Data sources Data for this study were collected through focus group discussions with change initiators involved in interdisciplinary team initiatives at a rehabilitation service in Ireland. Review methods A reflexive thematic analysis was employed to analyse the focus group data, which involved identifying patterns and themes within the narratives provided by participants. Results Three overarching themes emerged from the analysis: 1. \"Nature of the Battle for Change\", 2. \"Characteristics of the 'Status Quo' and Contradictions to IDT Working,\" and 3. \"Power and Identity: Threats to Hierarchy and Status\". These themes shed light on the challenges faced in implementing interdisciplinary teamwork, particularly the perceived threats to individual power and professional identity within hierarchical healthcare structures. Conclusion Implementing healthcare changes, especially in historically hierarchical healthcare systems is complex. Interdisciplinary team rehabilitation can challenge the status quo, posing adoption barriers. A nuanced, bottom-up approach is recommended, emphasizing long-term coalition building, continuous professional development, and early discussions about hierarchy and status. These recommendations offer practical guidance for stakeholders seeking to implement interdisciplinary, person-oriented approaches in rehabilitation practices, facilitating better anticipation and resolution of challenges, and ultimately improving care delivery and patient outcomes.