Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32525923›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Effective communication and collaboration with health professionals: A qualitative study of primary care pharmacists in Western Australia.

Tin Fei Sim, H Laetitia Hattingh, Bruce Sunderland, Petra Czarniak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors.

Tin Fei SimSchool of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0068-5006
H Laetitia HattinghSchool of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia.
Bruce SunderlandSchool of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6214-995X
Petra CzarniakSchool of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe expanded provision of professional services by community pharmacists in the primary care setting encompasses the necessity to communicate and collaborate with other health professionals. Little is currently known about contemporary processes employed for their achievement.

objectiveTo explore contemporary processes employed for effective communication and collaboration between primary care pharmacists and health professionals.

methodsIn-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with pharmacists practising in primary care settings requiring varying expertise, practice experience and speciality backgrounds. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded using NVivo version 11. Data were analysed following an inductive approach to facilitate thematic analysis.

resultsTwenty-six pharmacists were interviewed, which achieved data saturation. Five overarching themes emerged as participants described their experiences and perspectives regarding processes employed for communication and collaboration: i) tailored means of communication, ii) referral processes, iii) facilitators for effective interactions, iv) barriers to effective interactions, and v) implementation of a national digital health record. Participants acknowledged that the changing landscape of the Australian health system affected communication and collaboration with other health professionals. The changes resulted in participants' acceptance of a multidisciplinary approach to healthcare, which was contingent upon effective communication, interactions and relationships with other health professionals. Varying levels of formality and characteristics of referrals were identified, however the nature of the communication was tailored to the individual scenario or circumstance that was considered appropriate.

conclusionsPharmacists exercised judgment on a case-by-case basis when tailoring the means of communication. The establishment of a consistent and structured two-way referral process between health professionals within the primary care setting is important, which includes use of the national digital health record. Increased awareness and appreciation of each health professional's roles and expertise would further enhance inter-professional collaboration.

Indexed as

Interprofessional RelationsAdultFemaleHumansIntersectoral CollaborationMaleMiddle AgedPharmacistsPhysiciansPrimary Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesWestern Australia

Identifiers

PMID32525923
PMCPMC7289401

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.