King's College London

Research portal

Examining the nature of interprofessional practice: An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Examining the nature of interprofessional practice : An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT). / Xyrichis, Andreas; Reeves, Scott; Zwarenstein, Merrick.

In: Journal of Interprofessional Care, 13.12.2017, p. 1-10.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Xyrichis, A, Reeves, S & Zwarenstein, M 2017, 'Examining the nature of interprofessional practice: An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT)', Journal of Interprofessional Care, pp. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1408576

APA

Xyrichis, A., Reeves, S., & Zwarenstein, M. (2017). Examining the nature of interprofessional practice: An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT). Journal of Interprofessional Care, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1408576

Vancouver

Xyrichis A, Reeves S, Zwarenstein M. Examining the nature of interprofessional practice: An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT). Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2017 Dec 13;1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1408576

Author

Xyrichis, Andreas ; Reeves, Scott ; Zwarenstein, Merrick. / Examining the nature of interprofessional practice : An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT). In: Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2017 ; pp. 1-10.

Bibtex Download

@article{57f778225c694081bb242c2bbcfa65bf,
title = "Examining the nature of interprofessional practice: An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT)",
abstract = "The practice of, and research on interprofessional working in healthcare, commonly referred to as teamwork, has been growing rapidly. This has attracted international policy support flowing from the growing belief that patient safety and quality of care can only be achieved through the collective effort of the multiple professionals caring for a given patient. Despite the increasing policy support, the evidence for effectiveness lags behind: while there are supporting analytic epidemiological studies, few reliable intervention studies have been published and so we have yet to confirm a causal link. We argue that this lag in evidence development may be because interprofessional terms (e.g. teamwork, collaboration) remain conceptually unclear, with no common terminology or definitions, making it difficult to distinguish interventions from each other. In this paper, we examine published studies from the last decade in order to elicit current usage of terms related to interprofessional working; and, in so doing, undertake an initial empirical validation of an existing conceptual framework by mapping its four categories (teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking) against the descriptions of interprofessional interventions in the included studies. We searched Medline and Embase for papers describing interprofessional interventions using a standard approach. We independently screened papers and classified these under set categories following a thematic approach. Disagreements were resolved through consensus. Twenty papers met our inclusion criteria. Identified interprofessional work interventions fall into a range, from looser to tighter links between members. Definitions are inconsistently and inadequately applied. We found the framework to be a helpful and practical tool for classifying such interventions more consistently. Our analysis enabled us to scrutinise the original dimensions of the framework, confirm their usefulness and consistency, and reveal new sub-categories. We propose a slightly revised typology and a classification tool (InterPACT) for future validation, with four mutually exclusive categories: teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking. Consistent use, further examination and refinement of the new typology and tool may lead to greater clarity in definition and design of interventions. This should support the development of a reliable and coherent evidence base on interventions to promote interprofessional working in health and social care.",
keywords = "classification tool, collaboration, coordination, Interprofessional practice, networking, teamwork, validation",
author = "Andreas Xyrichis and Scott Reeves and Merrick Zwarenstein",
year = "2017",
month = dec,
day = "13",
doi = "10.1080/13561820.2017.1408576",
language = "English",
pages = "1--10",
journal = "Journal of Interprofessional Care",
issn = "1356-1820",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Examining the nature of interprofessional practice

T2 - An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT)

AU - Xyrichis, Andreas

AU - Reeves, Scott

AU - Zwarenstein, Merrick

PY - 2017/12/13

Y1 - 2017/12/13

N2 - The practice of, and research on interprofessional working in healthcare, commonly referred to as teamwork, has been growing rapidly. This has attracted international policy support flowing from the growing belief that patient safety and quality of care can only be achieved through the collective effort of the multiple professionals caring for a given patient. Despite the increasing policy support, the evidence for effectiveness lags behind: while there are supporting analytic epidemiological studies, few reliable intervention studies have been published and so we have yet to confirm a causal link. We argue that this lag in evidence development may be because interprofessional terms (e.g. teamwork, collaboration) remain conceptually unclear, with no common terminology or definitions, making it difficult to distinguish interventions from each other. In this paper, we examine published studies from the last decade in order to elicit current usage of terms related to interprofessional working; and, in so doing, undertake an initial empirical validation of an existing conceptual framework by mapping its four categories (teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking) against the descriptions of interprofessional interventions in the included studies. We searched Medline and Embase for papers describing interprofessional interventions using a standard approach. We independently screened papers and classified these under set categories following a thematic approach. Disagreements were resolved through consensus. Twenty papers met our inclusion criteria. Identified interprofessional work interventions fall into a range, from looser to tighter links between members. Definitions are inconsistently and inadequately applied. We found the framework to be a helpful and practical tool for classifying such interventions more consistently. Our analysis enabled us to scrutinise the original dimensions of the framework, confirm their usefulness and consistency, and reveal new sub-categories. We propose a slightly revised typology and a classification tool (InterPACT) for future validation, with four mutually exclusive categories: teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking. Consistent use, further examination and refinement of the new typology and tool may lead to greater clarity in definition and design of interventions. This should support the development of a reliable and coherent evidence base on interventions to promote interprofessional working in health and social care.

AB - The practice of, and research on interprofessional working in healthcare, commonly referred to as teamwork, has been growing rapidly. This has attracted international policy support flowing from the growing belief that patient safety and quality of care can only be achieved through the collective effort of the multiple professionals caring for a given patient. Despite the increasing policy support, the evidence for effectiveness lags behind: while there are supporting analytic epidemiological studies, few reliable intervention studies have been published and so we have yet to confirm a causal link. We argue that this lag in evidence development may be because interprofessional terms (e.g. teamwork, collaboration) remain conceptually unclear, with no common terminology or definitions, making it difficult to distinguish interventions from each other. In this paper, we examine published studies from the last decade in order to elicit current usage of terms related to interprofessional working; and, in so doing, undertake an initial empirical validation of an existing conceptual framework by mapping its four categories (teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking) against the descriptions of interprofessional interventions in the included studies. We searched Medline and Embase for papers describing interprofessional interventions using a standard approach. We independently screened papers and classified these under set categories following a thematic approach. Disagreements were resolved through consensus. Twenty papers met our inclusion criteria. Identified interprofessional work interventions fall into a range, from looser to tighter links between members. Definitions are inconsistently and inadequately applied. We found the framework to be a helpful and practical tool for classifying such interventions more consistently. Our analysis enabled us to scrutinise the original dimensions of the framework, confirm their usefulness and consistency, and reveal new sub-categories. We propose a slightly revised typology and a classification tool (InterPACT) for future validation, with four mutually exclusive categories: teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking. Consistent use, further examination and refinement of the new typology and tool may lead to greater clarity in definition and design of interventions. This should support the development of a reliable and coherent evidence base on interventions to promote interprofessional working in health and social care.

KW - classification tool

KW - collaboration

KW - coordination

KW - Interprofessional practice

KW - networking

KW - teamwork

KW - validation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038004819&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13561820.2017.1408576

DO - 10.1080/13561820.2017.1408576

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85038004819

SP - 1

EP - 10

JO - Journal of Interprofessional Care

JF - Journal of Interprofessional Care

SN - 1356-1820

ER -

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454