Primary care multidisciplinary teams in practice: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations for strengthening the US healthcare system consider restructuring primary care into multidisciplinary teams as vital to improving quality and efficiency. Yet, approaches to the selection of team designs remain unclear. This project describes current primary care team designs, primary care professionals' perceptions of ideal team designs, and perceived facilitating factors and barriers to implementing ideal team-based care. METHODS: Qualitative study of 44 health care professionals at 6 primary care practices in North Carolina using focus group discussions and surveys. Data was analyzed using framework content analysis. RESULTS: Practices used a variety of multidisciplinary team designs with the specific design being influenced by the social and policy context in which practices were embedded. Practices overwhelmingly located barriers to adopting ideal multidisciplinary teams as being outside of their individual practices and outside of their control. Participants viewed internal organizational contexts as the major facilitators of multidisciplinary primary care teams. The majority of practices described their ideal team design as including a social worker to meet the needs of socially complex patients. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care multidisciplinary team designs vary across practices, shaped in part by contextual factors perceived as barriers outside of the practices' control. Facilitating factors within practices provide a culture of support to team members, but they are insufficient to overcome the perceived barriers. The common desire to add social workers to care teams reflects practices' struggles to meet the complex demands of patients and external agencies. Government or organizational policies should avoid one-size-fits-all approaches to multidisciplinary care teams, and instead allow primary care practices to adapt to their specific contextual circumstances.American Academy of Family Physicians Foundation’s Joint Grant Award Program [#G1401JG

Effective healthcare teams require effective team members: defining teamwork competencies

BACKGROUND: Although effective teamwork has been consistently identified as a requirement for enhanced clinical outcomes in the provision of healthcare, there is limited knowledge of what makes health professionals effective team members, and even less information on how to develop skills for teamwork. This study identified critical teamwork competencies for health service managers. METHODS: Members of a state branch of the professional association of Australian health service managers participated in a teamwork survey. RESULTS: The 37% response rate enabled identification of a management teamwork competency set comprising leadership, knowledge of organizational goals and strategies and organizational commitment, respect for others, commitment to working collaboratively and to achieving a quality outcome. CONCLUSION: Although not part of the research question the data suggested that the competencies for effective teamwork are perceived to be different for management and clinical teams, and there are differences in the perceptions of effective teamwork competencies between male and female health service managers. This study adds to the growing evidence that the focus on individual skill development and individual accountability and achievement that results from existing models of health professional training, and which is continually reinforced by human resource management practices within healthcare systems, is not consistent with the competencies required for effective teamwork

Describing knowledge encounters in healthcare: a mixed studies systematic review and development of a classification

This review was self-funded

Evaluating the effectiveness of health care teams.

While it is recognised that effective health care teams are associated with quality patient care, the literature is comparatively sparse in defining the outcomes of effective teamwork. This literature review of the range of organisational, team and individual benefits of teamwork complements an earlier article which summarised the antecedent conditions for (input) and team processes (throughput) of effective teams. This article summarises the evidence for a range of outcome measures of effective teams. Organisational benefits of teamwork include reduced hospitalisation time and costs, reduced unanticipated admissions, better accessibility for patients, and improved coordination of care. Team benefits include efficient use of health care services, enhanced communication and professional diversity. Patients report benefits of enhanced satisfaction, acceptance of treatment and improved health outcomes. Finally, team members report enhanced job satisfaction, greater role clarity and enhanced well-being. Due to the inherent complexity of teamwork, a constituency model of team evaluation is supported where key stakeholders identify and measure the intended benefits of a team

Advising patients to increase fluid intake for treating acute respiratory infections.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory infection is a common reason for people to present for medical care. Advice to increase fluid intake is a frequent treatment recommendation. Attributed benefits of fluids include replacing increased insensible fluid losses, correcting dehydration from reduced intake and reducing the viscosity of mucus. However, there are theoretical reasons for increased fluid intake to cause harm. Anti-diuretic hormone secretion is increased in lower respiratory tract infections of various aetiologies. This systematic examination of the evidence sought to determine the benefit versus harm from increasing fluid intake. OBJECTIVES: To answer the following questions. (1) Does recommending increased fluid intake as a treatment for acute respiratory infections improve duration and severity of symptoms? (2) Are there adverse effects from recommending increased fluids in people with acute respiratory infections? (3) Are any benefits or harms related to site of infection (upper or lower respiratory tract) or a different severity of illness? SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to July Week 1, 2005), EMBASE (1974 to Week 29, 2005), Current Contents (current 5 years) and CINAHL (1982 to July week 3 2005). Reference lists of articles identified were searched, and experts in the relevant disciplines were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effect of increasing fluid intake in people with acute respiratory infections. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Each author assessed the identified studies to determine eligibility for inclusion. MAIN RESULTS: No RCTs assessing the effect of increasing fluid intake in acute respiratory infections were found. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence for or against the recommendation to increase fluids in acute respiratory infections. The implications for fluid management in acute respiratory infections have not been studied in any RCTs to date. Some non-experimental (observational) studies report that increasing fluid intake in acute respiratory infections may cause harm. RCTs need to be done to determine the true effect of this very common medical advice