Search

Abstract Background Psychological safety is a team-based phenomenon whereby group members are empowered to ask questions, take appropriate risks, admit mistakes, propose novel ideas, and candidly voice concerns. Growing research supports the benefits of psychological safety in healthcare and education for patient safety, learning, and innovation. However, there is a paucity of research on how to create psychological safety, especially within academic medicine. To meet this need, the present study describes and evaluates a multi-year, medical school-wide psychological safety initiative. Methods We created, implemented, and assessed a multi-pronged psychological safety initiative including educational training sessions, departmental champions, videos, infographics, and targeted training for medical school leaders. Employees’ perceptions of psychological safety at both the departmental and institutional levels were assessed annually. The impact of educational training sessions was quantified by post-session surveys. Results Deidentified employee surveys revealed a statistically significant increase in departmental psychological safety between the first and second annual surveys. Perceived psychological safety remained lower at the institution-wide level than at the departmental level. No significant differences in psychological safety were observed based on gender, position, or employment length. Post-educational training session surveys showed that the sessions significantly increased knowledge of the topic as well as motivation to create a culture of psychological safety within the medical school. Conclusions This study establishes an evidence-based method for increasing psychological safety within medical school departments and serves as a template for other health professions schools seeking to promote psychological safety. Training leadership, faculty, and staff is an important first step towards creating a culture of psychological safety for everyone, including trainees.

Abstract Background Central to Safety-II is promoting resilience of healthcare practices. In the “Room for Resilience” research project we focus on the role of horizontal and vertical accountability in healthcare teams and aim to discover how the relation between the two impacts team reflections and discussions. In this article, we report on an explorative study at the start of the project which aimed to assess the structures and dynamics of horizontal and vertical accountability. Methods A qualitative study in six teams in three hospitals in the Netherlands. For the project, each team selected a specific clinical process to work on (e.g. pain assessment). We interviewed healthcare professionals, managers, and quality advisors about these processes, how they are discussed in practice and how teams need to account for them. Additionally, we observed the processes and how teams discuss them in practice. In total, we conducted 35 interviews and 67.5 h of observation. Transcripts and field notes were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Professionals at times varied in what they considered the right approach in the clinical process, with differing views on the importance of certain actions. When processes were discussed, this mostly was done during clinical work, and it often concerned reflections about the care for a specific patient instead of reflecting on the team’s general approach of the clinical process. Organized reflections on the processes were sparse. How processes were conducted in practice deviated from guidelines, mainly due to staff shortages, a perceived lack of value of a guideline, equipment issues, and collaboration issues. For most processes, accountability to hierarchical layers consisted of quality indicator scores. Professionals were tasked with registering indicator data but did not find this meaningful for their work. Conclusions The observed different perspectives within teams on what good quality care is show the importance of having team reflections about these processes. How vertical accountability was organized at times impacted the conditions for teams to discuss resilient performance. Following these findings, we recommend that reflection on resilient practice and the role of accountability processes is organized on all levels in (and outside) the organization.

IntroductionFluid teams have become increasingly prevalent and necessary for modern-day issues, yet they differ from more traditional teams, on which much of the current teams literature is based. For example, fluid teams are often comprised of members from different disciplines or organizational divisions who do not have a shared history or future, as they come together to perform a critical, time-sensitive task, and then disband. For these reasons, the mechanisms through which they function and perform may differ from those of more traditional teams, and research is needed to better understand these differences.MethodsTo this end, this study utilized critical incident techniques and thematic analysis to examine fluid teams within healthcare, one of the primary contexts in which they are prevalent. Interdisciplinary faculty and students in the medical field who encounter fluid teams within simulation-based education were prompted to reflect on key factors that facilitate or hinder fluid team effectiveness.ResultsPrimary themes extracted pertained to the conditions fluid teams operate within (e.g., high-stress), the behaviors and emergent states that contribute to their success (e.g., communication), and the KSAO’s of value for members of fluid teams to possess (e.g., readiness). These themes were then compared to existing literature, yielding the identification of some similarities but also many important differences between fluid and traditional teams.DiscussionA series of practical recommendations for how to promote fluid team effectiveness is then presented.

The aim of this paper is to inspire team research to apply diverse and unconventional perspectives to study team dynamics and performance in healthcare settings. To illustrate that using multiple perspectives can yield valuable insights, we examine a segment of a team interaction during a heart-surgery, using five distinct interdisciplinary perspectives known from small group research: the psychodynamic, functional, conflict-power-status, temporal, and social identity perspectives. We briefly describe each theoretical perspective, discuss its application to study healthcare teams, and present possible research questions for the segment at hand using the respective perspective. We also highlight the benefits and challenges associated with employing these diverse approaches and explore how they can be integrated to analyze team processes in health care. Finally, we offer our own insights and opinions on the integration of these approaches, as well as the types of data required to conduct such analyses. We also point to further research avenues and highlight the benefits associated with employing these diverse approaches. Finally, we offer our own insights and opinions on the integration of these approaches, as well as the types of data required to conduct such analyses.

In this prospective observational study, we investigate the role of transactive memory and speaking up in human-AI teams comprising 180 intensive care (ICU) physicians and nurses working with AI in a simulated clinical environment. Our findings indicate that interactions with AI agents differ significantly from human interactions, as accessing information from AI agents is positively linked to a team’s ability to generate novel hypotheses and demonstrate speaking-up behavior, but only in higher-performing teams. Conversely, accessing information from human team members is negatively associated with these aspects, regardless of team performance. This study is a valuable contribution to the expanding field of research on human-AI teams and team science in general, as it emphasizes the necessity of incorporating AI agents as knowledge sources in a team’s transactive memory system, as well as highlighting their role as catalysts for speaking up. Practical implications include suggestions for the design of future AI systems and human-AI team training in healthcare and beyond.

Background Addressing chronic diseases and intra-urban health disparities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) requires new health service models. Team-based healthcare models can improve management of chronic diseases/complex conditions. There is interest in integrating community health workers (CHWs) into these teams, given their effectiveness in reaching underserved populations. However healthcare team models are difficult to effectively implement, and there is little experience with team-based models in LMICs and with CHW-integrated models more generally. Our study aims to understand the determinants related to the poor adoption of Ethiopia’s family health teams (FHTs); and, raise considerations for initiating CHW-integrated healthcare team models in LMIC cities. Methods Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we examine organizational-level factors related to implementation climate and readiness (work processes/incentives/resources/leadership) and systemlevel factors (policy guidelines/governance/financing) that affected adoption of FHTs in two Ethiopian cities. Using semi-structured interviews/focus groups, we sought implementation perspectives from 33 FHT members and 18 administrators. We used framework analysis to deductively code data to CFIR domains. Results Factors associated with implementation climate and readiness negatively impacted FHT adoption. Failure to tap into financial, political, and performance motivations of key stakeholders/FHT members contributed to low willingness to participate, while resource constraints restricted capacity to implement. Workload issues combined with no financial incentives/perceived benefit contributed to poor adoption among clinical professionals. Meanwhile, staffing constraints and unavailability of medicines/supplies/transport contributed to poor implementation readiness, further decreasing willingness among clinical professionals/managers to prioritize non-clinic based activities. The federally- driven program failed to provide budgetary incentives or tap into political motivations of municipal/health centre administrators. Conclusion Lessons from Ethiopia’s challenges in implementing its FHT program suggest that LMICs interested in adopting CHW-integrated healthcare team models should closely consider health system readiness (budgets, staffing, equipment/medicines) as well as incentivization strategies (financial, professional, political) to drive organizational change.

IntroductionPerceived teamwork quality is associated with numerous work-related outcomes, ranging from team effectiveness to job satisfaction. This study explored what situational and stable factors affect the perceived quality of teamwork during a specific team task: when a medical team comprising a senior (supervisor) and a junior (trainee) physician diagnoses a patient.MethodsDuring a field study in an emergency department, multisource data describing the patients, the diagnosing physicians, and the context were collected, including physicians’ ratings of their teamwork. The relationships between perceived teamwork quality and situational (e.g., workload) and stable (e.g., seniority) factors were estimated in a latent regression model using the structural equation modeling (SEM) approach.ResultsAcross the N = 495 patients included, SEM analyses revealed that the patient-specific case clarity and urgency influenced the perceived teamwork quality positively, whereas the work experience of the supervisor influenced the perceived teamwork quality of both supervisor and trainee negatively, albeit to different degrees.DiscussionOur findings shed light on the complex underpinnings of perceived teamwork quality, a performance-relevant factor that may influence work and organizational effectiveness in healthcare settings.

Abstract Background Professional subgroups are common and may play a role in aiding professional maturity or impeding professional legitimization. The chiropractic profession in the United States has a long history of diverse intra-professional subgroups with varying ideologies and practice styles. To our knowledge, large-scale quantification of chiropractic professional subgroups in the United States has not been conducted. The purpose of this study was to quantify and describe the clinical practice beliefs and behaviors associated with United States chiropractic subgroups. Methods A 10% random sample of United States licensed chiropractors (n = 8975) was selected from all 50 state regulatory board lists and invited to participate in a survey. The survey consisted of a 7-item questionnaire; 6 items were associated with chiropractic ideological and practice characteristics and 1 item was related to the self-identified role of chiropractic in the healthcare system which was utilized as the dependent variable to identify chiropractic subgroups. Multinomial logistic regression with predictive margins was used to analyze which responses to the 6 ideology and practice characteristic items were predictive of chiropractic subgroups. Results A total of 3538 responses were collected (39.4% response rate). Respondents self-identified into three distinct subgroups based on the perceived role of the chiropractic profession in the greater healthcare system: 56.8% were spine/neuromusculoskeletal focused; 22.0% were primary care focused; and 21.2% were vertebral subluxation focused. Patterns of responses to the 6 ideologies and practice characteristic items were substantially different across the three professional subgroups. Conclusions Respondents self-identified into one of three distinct intra-professional subgroups. These subgroups can be differentiated along themes related to clinical practice beliefs and behaviors.

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent pressures on healthcare staff and resources have exacerbated the need for clinical teams to reflect and learn from workplace experiences. Surges in critically ill patients, the impact of the disease on the workforce and long term adjustments in work and life have upturned our normality. Whilst this situation has generated a new ‘connectedness’ within healthcare workers, it also continues to test our resilience. An international multi-professional collaboration has guided the identification of ongoing difficulties to effective communication and debriefing, as well as emerging opportunities to promote a culture of dialogue. This article outlines pandemic related barriers and new possibilities categorising them according to task management, teamwork, situational awareness and decision making. It describes their direct and indirect impact on clinical debriefing and signposts towards solutions to overcome challenges and, building on new bridges, advance team conversations that allow us to learn, improve and support each other. This pandemic has brought clinical professionals together; nevertheless, it is essential to invest in further developing and supporting cohesive teams. Debriefing enables healthcare teams and educators to mitigate stress, build resilience and promote a culture of continuous learning and patient care improvement.

Abstract Background Psychological safety allows healthcare professionals to take the interpersonal risks needed to engage in effective teamwork and to maintain patient safety. In order to improve psychological safety in healthcare teams, an in-depth understanding of the complex and nuanced nature of psychological safety is needed. Psychological safety concepts, including voice, silence, learning behaviour, support and familiarity, informed the current study’s investigation of psychological safety. This study aims to use a mixed-methods approach to develop an in-depth understanding of psychological safety within healthcare teams and to build on this understanding to inform the development of future interventions to improve it. Methods Survey, observational and interview data are triangulated in order to develop an in- depth understanding of psychological safety within four healthcare teams, working within one case study hospital. The teams taking part included one multidisciplinary and three unidisciplinary teams. Observational and survey data were collected during and immediately following team meetings. Individual interviews were conducted with 31 individuals across the four teams. Thematic analysis was used to analyse these interviews. Results Survey results indicated a high level of psychological safety. However, observations and interviews captured examples of silence and situations where participants felt less psychologically safe. Findings from across all three data sources are discussed in relation to voice and silence, learning, familiarity and support. Conclusion The results of this study provide a detailed description and in-depth understanding of psychological safety within four healthcare teams. Based on this, recommendations are made for future research and the development of interventions to improve psychological safety.

Abstract Background Psychological safety is a dynamic team-level phenomenon which exists when team members believe that it is safe to take interpersonal risks. In healthcare teams, the presence of psychological safety is critical to delivering safe care. Scholars have highlighted a need for alternative measures which compliment survey-based measures of psychological safety in healthcare teams. Methods The exploratory phase of this study raised concerns about whether current survey measures could provide a sufficient understanding of psychological safety within healthcare teams to inform strategies to improve it. Thus, previously validated psychological safety surveys and a meeting observation measure were adapted for use in healthcare teams. First, two group feedback sessions were held with 22 healthcare professionals, as well as a systematic literature review. Then, the members of eleven healthcare teams in Ireland and The Netherlands (n = 135) took part in the pilot test of the adapted composite measure. Results The final composite measure has two parts: a team meeting observation measure and an adapted survey. The observation measure has 31 observable behaviours fitting seven categories: voice, defensive voice, silence behaviours, supportive, unsupportive, learning or improvement-oriented and familiarity type behaviours. The survey part consists of 19 items in three sub-dimensions related to; the team leader, other team members and the team as a whole. Three additional items capture the perceived representativeness of the observed team meeting compared to other similar meetings. Final adaptations were made in order to integrate the observation and survey measure. Conclusions The resulting composite measure combines the strengths of observational and survey measures and is tailored for use in healthcare teams. It is uniquely co-developed with healthcare professionals and grounded in the psychological safety and healthcare literature. This composite measure can enable longitudinal research on psychological safety and inform future research to develop and test interventions to improve psychological safety.

Abstract Background A high variety of team interventions aims to improve team performance outcomes. In 2008, we conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of the scientific studies focused on these interventions. However, over the past decade, the literature on team interventions has rapidly evolved. An updated overview is therefore required, and it will focus on all possible team interventions without restrictions to a type of intervention, setting, or research design. Objectives To review the literature from the past decade on interventions with the goal of improving team effectiveness within healthcare organizations and identify the “evidence base” levels of the research. Methods Seven major databases were systematically searched for relevant articles published between 2008 and July 2018. Of the original search yield of 6025 studies, 297 studies met the inclusion criteria according to three independent authors and were subsequently included for analysis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Scale was used to assess the level of empirical evidence. Results Three types of interventions were distinguished: (1) Training, which is sub-divided into training that is based on predefined principles (i.e. CRM: crew resource management and TeamSTEPPS: Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety), on a specific method (i.e. simulation), or on general team training. (2) Tools covers tools that structure (i.e. SBAR: Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation, (de)briefing checklists, and rounds), facilitate (through communication technology), or trigger (through monitoring and feedback) teamwork. (3) Organizational (re)design is about (re)designing structures to stimulate team processes and team functioning. (4) A programme is a combination of the previous types. The majority of studies evaluated a training focused on the (acute) hospital care setting. Most of the evaluated interventions focused on improving non-technical skills and provided evidence of improvements. Conclusion Over the last decade, the number of studies on team interventions has increased exponentially. At the same time, research tends to focus on certain interventions, settings, and/or outcomes. Principle-based training (i.e. CRM and TeamSTEPPS) and simulation-based training seem to provide the greatest opportunities for reaching the improvement goals in team functioning.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement, leaders in the field of interprofessional (IP) education have encouraged faculty to explore online adaptations to curriculum and examine strategies that enhance students’ structural competence. Structural competence is broadly defined as the ability to understand how oppression, governmental policies, and environmental inputs impact the health and well-being of an individual. With these changes in mind, a team of IP health science faculty developed two online curricular activities guided by the “common reading” book, Five Days at Memorial: Life and Death in a Storm-Ravaged Hospital by Sheri Fink. This article describes the development and findings of a mixed-methods evaluation of the two IP learning activities: (a) The Interprofessional Common Reading Experience (IPCRE) and (b) The IPCRE follow-up. The activities engaged over 250 students across multiple health professions (i.e., social work, nursing, athletic training, speech-language pathology, nutrition, and public health) attending three different universities. Our findings contribute to a greater understanding of how to develop online IP activities and curricular innovations that help to train equity-minded and anti-racist practitioners.

Healthcare systems are complex adaptive systems, requiring a change in leadership style, from the traditional model to collaborative, values-driven leadership (VDL). Family physicians are well positioned to facilitate integration and coordination between levels of care, across specialties and within teams, in partnership with local and district management team members. This short report describes a leadership innovation experience in a rural South African district, where a VDL course was introduced in a district health context to build on a strong tradition of relationship-centred outreach and support aimed at creating a learning health system. The authors reflect on the contribution of family physicians to strengthen team-based capacity building, care coordination and a learning culture aimed at quality improvement from the perspectives of the regional and district hospital environments. A values-based leadership style will enable family physicians to strengthen team-relationships and create organisational environments, which support shared learning and quality improvement approaches. Ultimately this approach should lead to improved health systems.

Modern healthcare involves teams composed of educators, learners, healthcare providers, patients, patients’ significant others and families, healthcare administrators, and information sources. Principles of social psychology are relevant to interactions among team members when learning and performing professional duties; communicating to build trust, commitment, and teamwork; and collaborating among members of the healthcare team. This paper briefly discusses several classic principles of social psychology and how they apply to healthcare teams and medical education. Understanding and applying these principles will help healthcare providers optimize performance and interactions with colleagues, learners, and patients. It is important to incorporate study and practice of these principles into medical education and professional development.

Background: Systematic studies on team performance have focused on subjective measurement approaches like survey instruments, focusing primarily on identifying the most robust and psychometrically valid surveys, and not on objective measures. One of the drawbacks of identifying improvements in team performance with surveys is that we may not be considering any secular trends that may be happening between the time points that the surveys are being administered . This review aims to establish a summary of the literature that has used key performance indicators -which are a set of quantifiable, measurable values - to concurrently validate their team performance surveys. Methods: The research question “What are the key performance indicators that are used to concurrently validate team performance in hospitals?” was addressed through a systematic review. The review was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewing and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The search was conducted using the “ECLIPSE” framework, The databases used to perform the search were PubMed, PsycINFO (Proquest), ABIInform (Global Proquest) and CINAHL. The search was limited to studies between 2009 and 2019 (10-year period). Results: The total number of articles yielded by the search was 5973, of these there were 1736 duplicates. Of the 4237 articles shortlisted for title and abstract screening, 4189 were irrelevant and 48 articles were retained for full screening. Following full text screening 33 articles were excluded, leaving a total of 15 studies included in this review. The 15 included studies have KPIs and surveys that can be interpreted under the following common headings: Mortality, Incident Reports and Patient Safety Indicators, Absenteeism, Efficiency Metrics, and Financial Distress. The most common KPIs that the studies simultaneously assessed for impact were mortality (5) length of stay (3), patient safety indicators (3) absenteeism (2) , and financial distress (1), The most common concepts being measured by the surveys were Staff Satisfaction (5), Safety Culture (4), Patient Satisfaction (4), clinical governance (1), Support and Success (1) and Organizational Culture (1). Conclusions: Patient safety managers and healthcare staff should consider exploring the use of tailored, meaningful objective metrics at the team level along with validated survey measures. Researchers could make a more meaningful contribution by conducting longitudinal studies that explore not only how these measures correlate but identifying the changes over time. However, repeated measurement and crude organizational level metrics, without more in-depth exploration and tailored interventions at the team level, cannot be expected to improve patient safety culture.

Background: Community Health Workers (CHW) can be an important and evidence-based response to reduce unnecessary morbidity and mortality in chronic diseases like asthma, heart disease, diabetes, cancers, HIV, and maternal/child health, and mental health. Georgia’s urban and rural diverse populations are at high risk from many of these conditions. Largely the outcomes in controlling these health issues are nonmedical and include social determinants of health, i.e., access to care, transportation, inadequate housing, and health literacy. CHWs can increase the capacity of individuals, families, and communities to improve their health. Historically, concerns of CHWs on healthcare teams to address these issues have centered on standardized training, credentialing, and challenges about the unique roles and responsibilities of CHWs. In this article, we discuss the evidence of effectiveness and return on investment as CHW interventions prove to reduce visits to the Emergency Departments and unnecessary hospitalizations from chronic diseases. They serve to connect social and medical resources and ensure patients to not fall through gaps, especially among the vulnerable populations.Methods: We conducted a scan of CHW research studies, projects and programs that demonstrate effectiveness and return on investment. We also review CHW efforts in Georgia, timeline, and stakeholders to formally recognize, advance professionalism, and fully integrate CHWs as essential and sustainable members of the healthcare team.Results: There is significant evidence for the effectiveness of CHWs and the cost-benefit of CHW programs. Georgia has ongoing formal efforts to establish a sustainable and well-trained CHW workforceConclusions: A well-trained CHW workforce can be an important response to the transformation of Georgia’s community health practice and status, decreasing excess morbidity and mortality, and advancing health equity. Georgia should build on its own considerable experience with CHWs and the evidence of effectiveness to fully integrate CHWs into the healthcare system.

Abstract Background Complexity science has been introduced in healthcare as a theoretical framework to better understand complex situations. Interdisciplinary healthcare teams can be viewed as Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) by focusing more on the team members’ interaction with each other than on the characteristics of individual team members. Viewing teams in this way can provide us with insights into the origins of team behaviour. The aim of this study is to describe the functioning of a healthcare team as it originates from the members’ interactions using the CAS principles as a framework and to explore factors influencing workplace learning as emergent behaviour. Methods An interview study was done with 21 palliative home-care nurses, 20 community nurses and 18 general practitioners in Flanders, Belgium. A two-step analysis consisted of a deductive approach, which uses the CAS principles as coding framework for interview transcripts, followed by an inductive approach, which identifies patterns in the codes for each CAS principle. Results All CAS principles were identified in the interview transcripts of the three groups. The most prevalent principles in our study were principles with a structuring effect on team functioning: team members act autonomously guided by internalized basic rules; attractors shape the team functioning; a team has a history and is sensitive to initial conditions; and a team is an open system, interacting with its environment. The other principles, focusing on the result of the structuring principles, were present in the data, albeit to a lesser extent: team members’ interactions are non-linear; interactions between team members can produce unpredictable behaviour; and interactions between team members can generate new behaviour. Patterns, reflecting team behaviour, were recognized in the coding of each CAS principle. Patterns of team behaviour, identified in this way, were linked to interprofessional competencies of the Interprofessional Collaboration Collaborative. Factors influencing workplace learning were identified. Conclusions This study provides us with insights into the origin of team functioning by explaining how patterns of interactions between team members define team behaviour. Viewing healthcare teams as Complex Adaptive Systems may offer explanations of different aspects of team behaviour with implications for education, practice and research.

Resumen Introducción Las organizaciones de salud son altamente complejas y especializadas. En este escenario es necesario que los profesionales de salud trabajen colaborativamente en equipos de trabajo interprofesionales, asegurando un cuidado de calidad y seguro. Para fortalecer el trabajo en equipo interprofesional, es imperativo mejorar la gestión estratégica de recursos humanos en organizaciones de salud, promoviendo la satisfacción de sus miembros. Objetivo Analizar la satisfacción de los miembros de equipos interprofesionales, explorando sus relaciones interpersonales, liderazgo y clima de equipo en un contexto hospitalario. Metodología Estudio de métodos mixtos secuencial explicatorio (cuantitativo-cualitativo) en 53 equipos (409 profesionales) de un hospital universitario en Santiago, Chile. Primera fase incluyó encuestas a los miembros de equipos para examinar satisfacción con el equipo, liderazgo transformacional y clima. Utilizando análisis de redes sociales para identificar interacciones entre sus miembros (densidad y cohesión). Segunda fase incorpora 15 entrevistas a profesionales de equipos con los puntaje más altos y bajos de satisfacción. Integración de los resultados de ambas fases. Resultados Asociaciones significativas entre las variables y un modelo de regresión lineal que reveló que el clima de equipo (β = 0.26) es un mejor predictor de la satisfacción con el equipo, que el liderazgo transformacional (β = 0.17). Enfermería fue el profesional con el más alto puntaje en liderazgo transformacional (media = 64), seguido por el medico (media = 33). Las redes sociales de los equipos con puntajes extremos de satisfacción mostraron diferencias en cohesión y centralidad. El análisis de las entrevistas entrego cinco temas: atributos del trabajo interprofesional; colaboración, comunicación e interacción social; innovación en equipo interprofesional; liderazgo compartido; interface entre relaciones interpersonales de trabajo y social. Integración de los resultados reveló que la satisfacción requiere participación y comunicación, metas comunes y compromiso con un cuidado centrado en el paciente, claridad de roles y responsabilidades para trabajar colaborativamente y la presencia de liderazgo transformacional para fortalecer el bienestar, diálogo e innovación. Conclusión Los resultados tienen el potencial de contribuir a la planificación y toma de decisiones en el área de recursos humanos en salud con elementos que promuevan la administración de equipos de salud apoyando la satisfacción de sus miembros. Pudiendo llevar a permanencia laboral especialmente donde las necesidades locales de salud son más urgentes.

Introduction: Organisational culture is believed to be an important facilitator for better integrated care, yet how organisational culture impacts integrated care remains underspecified. In an exploratory study, we assessed the relationship between organisational culture in primary care centres as perceived by primary care teams and patient-perceived levels of integrated care. Theory and methods: We analysed a sample of 2,911 patient responses and 17 healthcare teams in four primary care centres. We used three-level ordered logistic regression models to account for the nesting of patients within health care teams within primary care centres. Results: Our results suggest a non-linear relationship between organisational culture at the team level and integrated care. A combination of different culture types—including moderate levels of production-oriented, hierarchical and team-oriented cultures and low or high levels of adhocracy cultures—related to higher patient-perceived levels of integrated care. Conclusions and discussion: Organisational culture at the level of healthcare teams has significant associations with patient-perceived integrated care. Our results may be valuable for primary care organisations in their efforts to compose healthcare teams that are predisposed to providing better integrated care.

Interprofessional education is a collaborative approach to develop healthcare students as future interprofessional team members and a recommendation suggested by the Institute of Medicine. Complex medical issues can be best addressed by interprofessional teams. Training future healthcare providers to work in such teams will help facilitate this model resulting in improved healthcare outcomes for patients. In this paper, three universities, the Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, the University of Florida and the University of Washington describe their training curricula models of collaborative and interprofessional education.The models represent a didactic program, a community-based experience and an interprofessional-simulation experience. The didactic program emphasizes interprofessional team building skills, knowledge of professions, patient centered care, service learning, the impact of culture on healthcare delivery and an interprofessional clinical component. The community-based experience demonstrates how interprofessional collaborations provide service to patients and how the environment and availability of resources impact one's health status. The interprofessional-simulation experience describes clinical team skills training in both formative and summative simulations used to develop skills in communication and leadership.One common theme leading to a successful experience among these three interprofessional models included helping students to understand their own professional identity while gaining an understanding of other professional's roles on the health care team. Commitment from departments and colleges, diverse calendar agreements, curricular mapping, mentor and faculty training, a sense of community, adequate physical space, technology, and community relationships were all identified as critical resources for a successful program. Summary recommendations for best practices included the need for administrative support, interprofessional programmatic infrastructure, committed faculty, and the recognition of student participation as key components to success for anyone developing an IPE centered program.