Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30574030›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2018

Suitability of a Programme for Improving Interprofessional Primary Care Team Meetings.

Jerôme Jean Jacques van Dongen, Marloes Amantia van Bokhoven, Wilhelmus Nicolaas Marie Goossens, Ramon Daniëls, Trudy van der Weijden, Anna Beurskens

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 74% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jerôme Jean Jacques van DongenResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with Chronic Illnesses, NL.
Marloes Amantia van BokhovenResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with Chronic Illnesses, NL.
Wilhelmus Nicolaas Marie GoossensResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with Chronic Illnesses, NL.
Ramon DaniëlsResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with Chronic Illnesses, NL.
Trudy van der WeijdenDepartment of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, NL.
Anna BeurskensResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with Chronic Illnesses, NL.
Maastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPrimary care is increasingly being confronted with complex health care demands stemming from both biomedical and psychosocial problems of people with chronic diseases. Interprofessional collaboration is needed to enhance person-centredness and coordinate care provision in an efficient manner, which should eventually result in high-quality and integrated care. In primary care, collaboration often occurs through periodic interprofessional team (IPT) meetings. We have developed a multifaceted programme (including a reflection framework, training activities and a toolbox) to enhance team functioning in terms of improved person-centredness and efficiency of meetings. The aim of this study was to evaluate the perceived suitability and potential impact of this programme. Eventually, findings of this evaluation should contribute to understanding the suitability of the programme and optimizing its design.

methodsA prospective process evaluation was conducted, using a mixed-methods approach. Six primary care IPTs participated. Data collection included observations of team meetings, semi-structured interviews with team chairpersons, a focus group meeting, and a questionnaire for all team members. Qualitative data were analysed using directed content analysis and quantitative data using descriptive statistics.

resultsThe results show that, on the whole, the programme was appreciated. Most progress was perceived regarding structure and organization. Chairs perceived increased awareness of person-centredness and team processes. They perceived the training activities as useful and instructive, and valued peer feedback and on-the-job coaching as the most effective strategies. Findings from the questionnaire showed a tendency in the desired direction for all variables.

conclusionTo conclude, the programme can be considered as a suitable approach for improving team functioning. However, enhancing person-centredness requires additional training/practice and on-the-job coaching. Lastly, the programme should be context-specific, flexible in use, and preferably delivered and mediated by an external facilitator at the workplace.

Indexed as

chronic diseasesintegrated careinterprofessional collaborationinterprofessional team meetingsprocess evaluationqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID30574030
PMCPMC6293205
OpenAlexW2904080546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.