Development of a Survey Instrument to Explore the Characteristics of Australian Private Physiotherapy Practitioners’ Interprofessional Interactions
01 Jan 2020-The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences & Practice (Nova Southeastern University)-Vol. 18, Iss: 4, pp 2
TL;DR: The development of a survey instrument that can be used to explore the characteristics of Australian private physiotherapy practitioners’ interprofessional interactions is described and may guide the development of effective interventions aimed at enhancing the nature and quality of clinical interactions between private physi therapy practitioners and other health practitioners working in Australia.
Abstract: Background: Interprofessional collaboration is a complex process defined by the relationships and interactions between health practitioners from diverse professional backgrounds. Although the benefits of a collaborative health workforce are widely acknowledged, it is currently poorly understood to what extent private physiotherapy practitioners engage in interprofessional collaboration as a part of their clinical practice, and whether they consider to be adequately trained in this area. Information regarding the frequency, modes of communication, and perceived level of satisfaction associated with private physiotherapy practitioners’ interprofessional interactions is also limited.
Purpose: The aim of this paper is to describe the development of a survey instrument that can be used to explore the characteristics of Australian private physiotherapy practitioners’ interprofessional interactions.
Methods: A multiphase process was used to develop the survey instrument. The research team conducted a literature search which resulted in the generation of 34 individual survey items. After the initial pool of survey items was developed, three experienced physiotherapists were invited to review the items. The draft survey instrument was then subject to online testing with private physiotherapy practitioners to evaluate the utility of the instrument. Results: All three physiotherapists invited to review the initial pool of survey items provided written feedback to the research team. Following revision, five private physiotherapy practitioners participated in pilot testing the survey instrument. Pilot testing revealed that approximately 10 minutes was required to complete the online survey.
Conclusions: The final survey instrument has 29 questions in six sections with categorical, Likert and free text response options and can be used to explore the characteristics of Australian private physiotherapy practitioners’ interprofessional interactions. Information obtained from future research projects utilising this survey may guide the development of effective interventions aimed at enhancing the nature and quality of clinical interactions between private physiotherapy practitioners and other health practitioners working in Australia.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This study shows that physiotherapists were predominately satisfied when interacting with health practitioners from various professional backgrounds, and the implementation of robust strategies that will support sustainable models of IPC in physiotherapy private practice is required.
Abstract: Effective interprofessional collaboration (IPC) contributes to superior patient outcomes, facilitates cost-efficient health care, and increases patient and practitioner satisfaction. However, there is concern that IPC may be difficult to implement in clinical settings that do not conform to formal team-based processes, such as mono-professional physiotherapy private practice facilities. The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of private physiotherapy practitioners' interprofessional interactions, including their experiences and perceptions regarding IPC. A custom developed cross-sectional online survey instrument was used to collect data from physiotherapists employed in private practice facilities in Queensland, Australia. In all, 49 (20% response rate) physiotherapists completed the survey. Only a small proportion (14%) indicated that their interprofessional interactions were a daily occurrence, and less than one-third of all respondents (31%) participated in formal, multi-professional face-to-face planned meetings. Most participants (76%) reported a moderate-to-high level of satisfaction regarding their interprofessional interactions. Despite low self-reported levels of interprofessional activity and other data indicating that IPC is necessary for holistic patient care, this study shows that physiotherapists were predominately satisfied when interacting with health practitioners from various professional backgrounds. Further research is required to inform the implementation of robust strategies that will support sustainable models of IPC in physiotherapy private practice.
4 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: The results demonstrate that the concept of collaboration is commonly defined through five underlying concepts: sharing, partnership, power, interdependency and process, and the most complete models of collaboration seem to be those based on a strong theoretical background.
Abstract: Interprofessional collaboration is a key factor in initiatives designed to increase the effectiveness of health services currently offered to the public. It is important that the concept of collaboration be well understood, because although the increasingly complex health problems faced by health professionals are creating more interdependencies among them, we still have limited knowledge of the complexity of interprofessional relationships. The goal of this literature review was to identify conceptual frameworks that could improve our understanding of this important aspect of health organizations. To this end, we have identified and taken into consideration: (A) the various definitions proposed in the literature and the various concepts associated with collaboration, and (B) the various theoretical frameworks of collaboration. Our results demonstrate that: (1) the concept of collaboration is commonly defined through five underlying concepts: sharing, partnership, power, interdependency and process; (2) the most complete models of collaboration seem to be those based on a strong theoretical background, either in organizational theory or in organizational sociology and on empirical data; (3) there is a significant amount of diversity in the way the various authors conceptualized collaboration and in the factors influencing collaboration; (4) these frameworks do not establish clear links between the elements in the models and the outputs; and (5) the literature does not provide a serious attempt to determine how patients could be integrated into the health care team, despite the fact that patients are recognized as the ultimate justification for providing collaborative care.
1,214 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide guidelines for the development and translation of questionnaires for application in medical fields, with a special emphasis on perioperative and pain medicine, and provide a framework to guide researchers through the various stages of questionnaire development.
Abstract: The task of developing a new questionnaire or translating an existing questionnaire into a different language might be overwhelming. The greatest challenge perhaps is to come up with a questionnaire that is psychometrically sound, and is efficient and effective for use in research and clinical settings. This article provides guidelines for the development and translation of questionnaires for application in medical fields, with a special emphasis on perioperative and pain medicine. We provide a framework to guide researchers through the various stages of questionnaire development and translation. To ensure that the questionnaires are psychometrically sound, we present a number of statistical methods to assess the reliability and validity of the questionnaires.
728 citations
TL;DR: There is not sufficient evidence to draw clear conclusions on the effects of IPC interventions across high-income countries, and functional status in stroke patients may be slightly improved by externally facilitated interprofessional activities, while patient-assessed quality of care and continuity of care are uncertain.
Abstract: Background
Poor interprofessional collaboration (IPC) can adversely affect the delivery of health services and patient care. Interventions that address IPC problems have the potential to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes.
Objectives
To assess the impact of practice-based interventions designed to improve interprofessional collaboration (IPC) amongst health and social care professionals, compared to usual care or to an alternative intervention, on at least one of the following primary outcomes: patient health outcomes, clinical process or efficiency outcomes or secondary outcomes (collaborative behaviour).
Search methods
We searched CENTRAL (2015, issue 11), MEDLINE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to November 2015. We handsearched relevant interprofessional journals to November 2015, and reviewed the reference lists of the included studies.
Selection criteria
We included randomised trials of practice-based IPC interventions involving health and social care professionals compared to usual care or to an alternative intervention.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of each potentially relevant study. We extracted data from the included studies and assessed the risk of bias of each study. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis of study outcomes, given the small number of included studies and their heterogeneity in clinical settings, interventions and outcomes. Consequently, we summarised the study data and presented the results in a narrative format to report study methods, outcomes, impact and certainty of the evidence.
Main results
We included nine studies in total (6540 participants); six cluster-randomised trials and three individual randomised trials (1 study randomised clinicians, 1 randomised patients, and 1 randomised clinicians and patients). All studies were conducted in high-income countries (Australia, Belgium, Sweden, UK and USA) across primary, secondary, tertiary and community care settings and had a follow-up of up to 12 months. Eight studies compared an IPC intervention with usual care and evaluated the effects of different practice-based IPC interventions: externally facilitated interprofessional activities (e.g. team action planning; 4 studies), interprofessional rounds (2 studies), interprofessional meetings (1 study), and interprofessional checklists (1 study). One study compared one type of interprofessional meeting with another type of interprofessional meeting. We assessed four studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and an equal number of studies to be at high risk of detection bias.
For studies comparing an IPC intervention with usual care, functional status in stroke patients may be slightly improved by externally facilitated interprofessional activities (1 study, 464 participants, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether patient-assessed quality of care (1 study, 1185 participants), continuity of care (1 study, 464 participants) or collaborative working (4 studies, 1936 participants) are improved by externally facilitated interprofessional activities, as we graded the evidence as very low-certainty for these outcomes. Healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended practices may be slightly improved with externally facilitated interprofessional activities or interprofessional meetings (3 studies, 2576 participants, low certainty evidence). The use of healthcare resources may be slightly improved by externally facilitated interprofessional activities, interprofessional checklists and rounds (4 studies, 1679 participants, low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on patient mortality, morbidity or complication rates.
Compared to multidisciplinary audio conferencing, multidisciplinary video conferencing may reduce the average length of treatment and may reduce the number of multidisciplinary conferences needed per patient and the patient length of stay. There was little or no difference between these interventions in the number of communications between health professionals (1 study, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence).
Authors' conclusions
Given that the certainty of evidence from the included studies was judged to be low to very low, there is not sufficient evidence to draw clear conclusions on the effects of IPC interventions. Neverthess, due to the difficulties health professionals encounter when collaborating in clinical practice, it is encouraging that research on the number of interventions to improve IPC has increased since this review was last updated. While this field is developing, further rigorous, mixed-method studies are required. Future studies should focus on longer acclimatisation periods before evaluating newly implemented IPC interventions, and use longer follow-up to generate a more informed understanding of the effects of IPC on clinical practice.
536 citations
Book•
23 Aug 2010
TL;DR: This book discusses current developments affecting interprofessional teamwork, as well as a conceptual framework for inter professional teamwork, and uses theory to better understand interProfessional teamwork.
Abstract: List of Boxes, Figures and Tables. The Authors. Series Foreword. Acknowledgements. Glossary. Introduction. 1. Interprofessional teamwork the basics. 2. Current developments affecting interprofessional teamwork. 3. Interprofessional teamwork: key concepts and issues. 4. A conceptual framework for interprofessional teamwork. 5. Using theory to better understand interprofessional teamwork. 6. Interprofessional teamwork interventions. 7. Evaluating interprofessional teamwork. 8. Synthesising studies of interprofessional teamwork. 9. Ways forward. References. Appendices. Index.
496 citations
TL;DR: A national study of 42 intensive care units involving over 1,700 respondents provides evidence for the reliability and validity of a comprehensive set of measures related to leadership, organizational culture, communication, coordination, problem solving-conflict management and team cohesiveness.
Abstract: Health Services Research has a growing need for reliable and valid measures of managerial practices and organizational processes. A national study of 42 intensive care units involving over 1,700 respondents provides evidence for the reliability and validity of a comprehensive set of measures related
447 citations