This study replicates a validation of the Interprofessional Collaboration Competency Attainment Survey (ICCAS), a 20-item self-report instrument designed to assess behaviours associated with patien...

The Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey (ICCAS): A replication validation study

This article examines the past, present and future of primary care and teamwork. It begins with a definition and description of primary care-its uniqueness, diversity and complexity, including the historical role of teams within primary care. The article then reviews the emergence of innovative primary care teams, including those grounded in new processes such as the Patient-Centered Medical Home and interprofessional teams that include new types of health professionals, particularly psychologists and other integrated behavioral health clinicians. The article describes key factors that support or hinder primary care teamwork, as well as evidence of the impact of these team-based models on patient outcomes, costs, and team members. It also discusses the role of primary care teams within multiteam systems (or 'teams of teams'), which are organized around the needs of patients and families, and the unique challenges these systems pose to coordinating care. The article concludes with recommendations for advancing teams in primary care, including changes in payment, descriptions of team competencies, models for primary care team training, and research necessary to inform the gaps in scientific knowledge. (PsycINFO Database Record

The complexity, diversity, and science of primary care teams.

Introduction:The need to be able to assess collaborative practice in health care teams has been recognized in response to the direction for team-based care in a number of policy documents. The purpose of this study is to report on further refinement of such a measurement instrument, the Assessment o

Assessment of Interprofessional Team Collaboration Scale (AITCS): Further Testing and Instrument Revision.

There is emerging consensus that enhanced inter-professional teamwork is necessary for the effective and efficient delivery of primary care, but there is less practical information specific to primary care available to guide practices on how to better work as teams.

Overcoming Challenges to Teamwork in Patient-Centered Medical Homes: A Qualitative Study

Valid assessment of interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP) is challenging. The number of instruments that measure various aspects of IPECP, or in various sites is growing, however. The Interprofessional Professionalism Assessment (IPA) measures observable behaviors of health care professionals-in-training that demonstrate professionalism and collaboration when working with other health care providers in the context of people-centered care. The IPA instrument was created by the Interprofessional Professionalism Collaborative (IPC), a national group representing 12 entry-level health professions and one medical education assessment organization. The instrument was created and evaluated over several years through a comprehensive, multi-phasic process: 1) development of construct and observable behaviors, 2) instrument design, expert review and cognitive interviews, and 3) psychometric testing. The IPA contains 26 items representing six domains of professionalism (altruism and caring, excellence, ethics, respect, communication, accountability), and was tested by 233 preceptors rating health profession learners in the final year of their practical training. These preceptors represented 30 different academic institutions across the U.S., worked in various types of practice sites, and evaluated learners representing 10 different entry-level health professions. Exploratory factor analysis suggested four factors (communication, respect, excellence, altruism and caring) using 21 items with the least amount of missing data, and confirmed, for the most part, a priori expectations. Internal consistency reliability coefficients for the entire instrument and its four subscales were high (all greater than 0.9). Psychometric results demonstrate aspects of the IPA's reliability and validity and its use across multiple health professions and in various practice sites.

The intersection of professionalism and interprofessional care: development and initial testing of the interprofessional professionalism assessment (IPA).

Interprofessional team-based care is increasingly regarded as an important feature of delivery systems redesigned to provide more efficient and higher quality care, including primary care. Measurement of the functioning of such teams might enable improvement of team effectiveness and could facilitate research on team-based primary care. Our aims were to develop a conceptual framework of high-functioning primary care teams to identify and review instruments that measure the constructs identified in the framework, and to create a searchable, web-based atlas of such instruments (available at: http://primarycaremeasures.ahrq.gov/team-based-care/ ). Our conceptual framework was developed from existing frameworks, the teamwork literature, and expert input. The framework is based on an Input-Mediator-Output model and includes 12 constructs to which we mapped both instruments as a whole, and individual instrument items. Instruments were also reviewed for relevance to measuring team-based care, and characterized. Instruments were identified from peer-reviewed and grey literature, measure databases, and expert input. From nearly 200 instruments initially identified, we found 48 to be relevant to measuring team-based primary care. The majority of instruments were surveys (n = 44), and the remainder (n = 4) were observational checklists. Most instruments had been developed/tested in healthcare settings (n = 30) and addressed multiple constructs, most commonly communication (n = 42), heedful interrelating (n = 42), respectful interactions (n = 40), and shared explicit goals (n = 37). The majority of instruments had some reliability testing (n = 39) and over half included validity testing (n = 29). Currently available instruments offer promise to researchers and practitioners to assess teams' performance, but additional work is needed to adapt these instruments for primary care settings.

A review of instruments to measure interprofessional team-based primary care

We surveyed users of a behavioral health helpline serving New York City and surroundings, to assess their helpline experiences, changes in psychological distress after contacting the helpline, and factors associated with differences in these measures. We surveyed users twice: roughly 2 weeks following their helpline contact, from 4/2019 to 9/2019 (N = 1097 respondents) and again 6 months following contact, from 10/2019 to 3/2020 (N = 732 respondents). Eighty-nine percent of respondents reported that contacting the helpline helped them deal a little or a lot more effectively with their problems. Rates of psychological distress decreased from 41.3% 2 weeks following helpline contact to 29.0% 6 months after (P < 0.05). Improvements in psychological distress were found across a range of demographic characteristics and were greatest for repeat users. Users reported broadly positive experiences with the helpline and improved psychological distress 6 months later. Behavioral health helplines can offer beneficial services to diverse populations, complementing the formal behavioral healthcare system. 

/pdf/satisfaction-and-mental-health-outcomes-associated-with-a-4z9ypgia.pdf

Satisfaction and Mental Health Outcomes Associated with a Large Regional Helpline

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Meaghan Hunt

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

A review of instruments to measure interprofessional team-based primary care

Satisfaction and Mental Health Outcomes Associated with a Large Regional Helpline