Interprofessional teamwork research - part 2

Research is central to developing knowledge on the effects and effectiveness of interprofessional teamwork. Research though demands a critical stance – one that has as a starting point the possibility that different teamwork approaches are needed, depending on local needs; and accepts that teamwork interventions may have a range of outcomes (e.g. success, no effect, failure).  All teamwork programmes should therefore be studies.  Given the complex array of factors shaping interprofessional teamwork, studying its processes, outcomes and impacts is difficult.  This is no reason, however, to abandon the attempt to improve teamwork in health and social care through informative, critical and empirical evaluation.  

(Scott Reeves, Editor-in-Chief)

To read more see: Reeves S, Zwarenstein M, Espin S, Lewin S (2010) Interprofessional Teamwork for Health and Social Care. Blackwell-Wiley, London. 

Interprofessional teamwork research - part 1

While there is a growing research literature on interprofessional teamwork, much of it consists of unproblematised accounts of health and social care teams.  For example, many studies rely on locally developed surveys or on data drawn from interviews with team members. These insights have provided a normative view of teamworking.  Furthermore, most evaluations rest upon an assumption that teamwork is essentially a positive and functional way to organise the delivery of health and social care.  Few studies offer a critical view of teamwork which draws upon dimensions of power, hierarchy and gender.  Interprofessional teamwork should be seen as a concept which describes a complex and contingent approach to the organisation of multiple professionals. 

(Scott Reeves, Editor-in-Chief)

To read more see: Reeves S, Zwarenstein M, Espin S, Lewin S (2010) Interprofessional Teamwork for Health and Social Care. Blackwell-Wiley, London. 

The use of magical thinking – an example

In the past few years I’ve noticed a growing use of consultants employed by health and social care institutions to ‘intervene’ in order to provide ‘solutions’ to poor interprofessional team relations.  An increasingly popular approach used by consultants attempting to offer solutions to teamwork problems is appreciative inquiry which encourages individuals to adopt a positive approach to managing change.  However, this type of inquiry has been criticised for its lack of critical analysis and oversight of pre-existing structural social, economic and political imbalances.  The use of such approaches to intervene in teams is problematic.  They not only overlook the complexity inherent in interprofessional teams, they also discourage attention to inequalities which can bedevil teamwork.  As such, they provide examples of ‘magical thinking’ – whereby real world thinking is replaced with notions of make-believe.

(Scott Reeves, Editor-in-Chief)

To read more see: Reeves S, Zwarenstein M, Espin S, Lewin S (2010) Interprofessional Teamwork for Health and Social Care. Blackwell-Wiley, London.

Classifying interprofessional interventions

Despite a growing amount of research on interprofessional interventions to promote collaboration and teamwork, systematic reviews in the interprofessional field have indicated that there was a continuing problem with the conceptualisation of different types of interprofessional educational and practice interventions.  Clarity has been traditionally inhibited by the lack of a robust evidence base for the effects of these interventions resulting in confusion between them, as can be seen in the variety of overlapping terms such as ‘interprofessional learning’, ‘interdisciplinary teamwork’ and ‘transdisciplinary practice’ which have been employed.  With colleagues, I undertook a scoping review to develop an empirically tested understanding of interprofessional interventions (including teamwork).  This project has involved a review of research to develop a model for helping to categorise interprofessional interventions.  Findings from an analysis of over 100 papers revealed three main types of interprofessional intervention:  (1) Education-based interventions: defined as those which included a curriculum with explicitly stated learning objectives/outcomes and learning activities (e.g. teamwork exercises, simulation, site visits and placements).  Examples ranged from pre-qualification interprofessional education initiatives which aimed to develop teamwork skills to post-qualification interprofessional education activities which focused on developing knowledge of different team members professional roles. (2) Practice-based interventions: defined as those which aimed to improve how professionals interact in practice.  Examples included the use of interprofessional meetings and communication tools such as checklists. (2) Organisation-based interventions: defined as those which aimed to affect interprofessional collaboration or teamwork by the use of organisational means such as the introduction of staffing policies or guidelines designed to enhance teamwork or the reconfiguration of workspace to promote the frequency and quality of interprofessional interactions. 

(Scott Reeves, Editor-in-Chief)

To read more see: To read more see: Reeves S, Zwarenstein M, Espin S, Lewin S (2010) Interprofessional Teamwork for Health and Social Care. Blackwell-Wiley, London.