Scholarlink

Background <p>Interprofessional collaboration (IPC), which involves healthcare professionals from different professions collaborating with patients and informal caregivers, is essential for the provision of high-quality person-centred geriatric rehabilitation. Person-centred geriatric rehabilitation involves addressing each patient’s unique needs throughout geriatric rehabilitation and multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs), where patients’ condition, goals, and treatment are discussed and evaluated; IPC is essential. However, there is a lack of knowledge about essential factors that influence IPC during MDTMs in geriatric rehabilitation. This study examined the factors affecting IPC during MDTMs, including the participants’ perceptions of IPC during the MDTM and the patient outcome measures used.</p> Methods <p>The research is a naturalistic observation study performed during 7 MDTMs with 41 participants from four geriatric rehabilitation facilities situated in nursing homes in the Netherlands. After the MDTM, participants completed a brief survey that included a VAS to determine their IPC experiences. They used the VAS to score their satisfaction with collaboration, MDTM conditions, and communication.</p> Results <p>Chair roles, time management, clear procedures, and actively participating healthcare professionals who share information and ask clarifying questions are all necessary for effective IPC during MDTMs. Involving patients and informal caregivers is also essential. Participants’ VAS scores were 7.9 (mean), 8.0 (median), and [7.3–8.9] IQR for collaboration, 7.8, 8.0, and [7.1–8.5] for sharing knowledge, and 6.6, 6.6, and [5.8-8.0] for MDTM conditions. Nonetheless, they identified areas for improvement, such as increasing interdependence. Occasionally, patient outcome measures were used.</p> Conclusion <p>Effective leadership and communication among the participants enhances IPC during MDTM. Being inactive and adopting a wait-and-see strategy during the MDTM hampers IPC and thereby potentially hinders optimal person-centred care. To establish effective MDTMs for high-quality person-centred geriatric rehabilitation, participants must be involved, accept responsibility, and collaborate with the chair.</p> Trial registration <p>Not applicable.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Interprofessional collaboration during multidisciplinary team meetings in geriatric rehabilitation: an observational study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月29日

查看全文
  • Arno J. Doornebosch,
  • Wilco P. Achterberg,
  • Hanneke J.A. Smaling

摘要

Background

Interprofessional collaboration (IPC), which involves healthcare professionals from different professions collaborating with patients and informal caregivers, is essential for the provision of high-quality person-centred geriatric rehabilitation. Person-centred geriatric rehabilitation involves addressing each patient’s unique needs throughout geriatric rehabilitation and multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs), where patients’ condition, goals, and treatment are discussed and evaluated; IPC is essential. However, there is a lack of knowledge about essential factors that influence IPC during MDTMs in geriatric rehabilitation. This study examined the factors affecting IPC during MDTMs, including the participants’ perceptions of IPC during the MDTM and the patient outcome measures used.

Methods

The research is a naturalistic observation study performed during 7 MDTMs with 41 participants from four geriatric rehabilitation facilities situated in nursing homes in the Netherlands. After the MDTM, participants completed a brief survey that included a VAS to determine their IPC experiences. They used the VAS to score their satisfaction with collaboration, MDTM conditions, and communication.

Results

Chair roles, time management, clear procedures, and actively participating healthcare professionals who share information and ask clarifying questions are all necessary for effective IPC during MDTMs. Involving patients and informal caregivers is also essential. Participants’ VAS scores were 7.9 (mean), 8.0 (median), and [7.3–8.9] IQR for collaboration, 7.8, 8.0, and [7.1–8.5] for sharing knowledge, and 6.6, 6.6, and [5.8-8.0] for MDTM conditions. Nonetheless, they identified areas for improvement, such as increasing interdependence. Occasionally, patient outcome measures were used.

Conclusion

Effective leadership and communication among the participants enhances IPC during MDTM. Being inactive and adopting a wait-and-see strategy during the MDTM hampers IPC and thereby potentially hinders optimal person-centred care. To establish effective MDTMs for high-quality person-centred geriatric rehabilitation, participants must be involved, accept responsibility, and collaborate with the chair.

Trial registration

Not applicable.