Search results

Collaboration between universities and industry is increasingly perceived as a vehicle to enhance innovation. Educational institutions are encouraged to build partnerships and multidisciplinary projects based around real-world open problems. Projects need to benefit student learning, not only the organisations looking for innovations. The context of this study is a multidisciplinary innovation project, as experienced by the students of an University of Applied Sciences in Finland. The purpose of this paper is to unfold students’ conceptions of the learning experience, to help teachers and curriculum designers to organise optimal conditions and processes, and support competence development. The research question was: How do students in higher professional education experience their learning in a multidisciplinary innovation project?

The study took a phenomenographic approach. The data were collected in the form of weekly diaries, maintained by the cultural management and social services students (n=74) in a mandatory multidisciplinary innovation project in professional higher education in Finland. The diary data were analysed using thematic inductive analysis.

The results of the study revealed that students’ understood the learning experience in relation to solvable conflicts and unusual situations they experienced during the project, while becoming aware of and claiming their collaborative agency and internalising phases of an innovation process. The competences as learning outcomes that students could name as developed related to content knowledge, different personal characteristics, social skills, emerging leadership skills, creativity, future orientation, social skills, technical, crafting and testing skills and innovation implementation-related skills, such as marketing, sales and entrepreneurship planning skills. However, future orientation and implementation planning skills showed more weakly than other variables in the data.

The findings suggest that curriculum design should enable networked, student-led and teacher supported pedagogical innovation processes that involve a whole path from future thinking and idea development through prototyping to implementation planning of the novel solution. Teachers promote deep comprehension of the innovation process, monitor and ease the pain of conflict if it threatens motivation, offer assessment tools and help in recognising gaps in individual competences and development needs, promote more future-oriented, concrete and implementable outcomes, and facilitate in bridging from innovation towards entrepreneurship planning.

The multidisciplinary innovation project described in this study provides a pedagogical way to connect higher education to the practises of society. These results provide encouraging findings for organising multidisciplinary project activities between education and working life. The paper, therefore, has significant value for teachers and entrepreneurship educators in designing curriculum and facilitating projects. The study promotes the dissemination of innovation development programmes in between education and work organisations also in other than technical and commercial fields.

Previous research has identified a need for greater clarity regarding the functions of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings in UK community mental health services. The purpose of this paper is to identify the functions of these meetings by systematically reviewing both primary research and academic discussion papers.

Papers relating to adult community mental health teams (CMHTs) in the UK and published between September 1999 and February 2014 were reviewed and appraised using NICE quality checklists. The search was broad in scope to include both general CMHTs and specialist CMHTs such as early intervention psychosis services and forensic mental health teams. A thematic synthesis of the findings was performed to develop an overarching thematic framework of the reported functions of MDT meetings.

None of the 4,046 studies identified directly investigated the functions of MDT meetings. However, 49 mentioned functions in passing. These functions were categorised into four thematic domains: discussing the care of individual patients, teamwork, team management and learning and development. Several papers reported a lack of clarity about the purpose of MDT meetings and the roles of different team members which hindered effective collaboration.

Without clearly agreed objectives for MDT meetings, monitoring their effectiveness is problematic. Unwarranted variation in their functioning may undermine the quality of care.

This is the first systematic review to investigate the functions of CMHT MDT meetings in the UK. The findings highlight a need for empirical research to establish how MDT meetings are being used so that their effectiveness can be understood, monitored and evaluated.

It is now common place for mental health services to operate using multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) where several health professionals simultaneously maintain their disciplinary distinctiveness and assume complementary professional roles. This requires awareness of other team members' disciplines and good team‐work skills. Yet in Australia, the preparation of health professionals continues to occur primarily in single‐discipline programs, where interaction with other disciplines often only occurs in an ad hoc, time‐limited way during clinical placement. This paper seeks to provide serious reflection on preparing students for the multidisciplinary practice within the mental health system.

The authors introduce a student placement preparation learning package that was developed and trialled with a range of health professional students at two Australian universities. Transformative learning principles underpinned the development of the education materials and related activities, which were designed to sensitise students to the potential problems that arise within MDTs and to equip them with communication strategies for use in their university placement experiences, as well as in their future professional practice.

The very large majority of student placement preparation workshop participants rated the workshop activities as extremely helpful. After participating in the activities, the very large majority of participants strongly endorsed the workshop learning objectives of understanding the different roles of MDTs members, skills required for working in MDTs, principles of collaborative team‐work and respectful, positive attitudes to MDTs members.

The transformative learning approaches to education of health professionals which are described in this paper help students to examine ways to think more critically and constructively about MDTs.

This paper describes the early development of clinical governance in an acute NHS Trust. Three Trust‐wide workshops and 17 individual departmental workshops were held between 1998‐1999. The discussions in these workshops were used to define the key founding principles of clinical governance and the operational structure. The philosophy behind clinical governance, to improve quality of services, was recognised as being part of mainstream trust business, not an optional add‐on. The authors found that teamwork and multidisciplinary collaboration are essential components of future quality improvement. Effective leadership skills need to be supported and developed, with responsibilities shared between a core group within each department rather than one individual. Contributions should be recognised and rewarded. Collaboration with primary care and involvement of patients are prerequisites. Specific objectives should be agreed by each department and used to monitor progress. More effective use of existing resources (staff, time, IT and training) can be made.

Maintaining user-focused integrated team working in complex care is one of the demands made of UK health and social care (H&SC) organisations who need employees that are resilient, resilience being the ability to persevere and thrive in the face of exposure to adverse situations (Rogerson and Ermes, 2008, p. 1). Grant and Kinman (2012) write that resilience is a complex and multi-dimensional construct that is underexplored in social care team work. The purpose of this paper is to capture the views of managers in H&SC to explore the making of resilient teams, identify factors that influence team performance and inform organisational workforce development strategy.

A general inductive approach (Silverman, 2011) was applied. Five focus groups were facilitated (n=40) each with eight participants all of whom were leaders and managers of teams in H&SC, working in the integrated care context in the UK.

Findings indicate that further investment in strategies and resources to sustain and educate employees who work in teams and further research into how organisational systems can facilitate this learning positively may contribute to resilient teams and performance improvement. The authors note specifically that H&SC organisations make a distinction between the two most prevalent team types and structures of multi-disciplinary and inter-professional and plan more targeted workforce development for individual and team learning for resiliency within these team structures. In doing so organisations may gain further advantages such as improved team performance in problematic care situations.

Data captured are self-reported perceptions of H&SC managers. Participant responses in the focus group situation may have been those expected rather than those actually modelled in the realities of team work practice (Tanggaard, 2008). Further, in the sample all participants were engaged in a higher education programme and it is possible participants may have been more engaged with their practice and thinking more critically about the research questions than those not currently undertaking postgraduate study (Ng et al., 2014). Nor were the researchers able to observe the participants in team work practice over time or during critical care delivery incidents.

The preliminary link made here between multi-disciplinary and inter-professional team type, and their different stress points and subsequent workforce intervention, contributes to the theory of resilient teams. This provides organisations with a foundation for the focus of workplace learning and training around resilience. H&SC practitioner views presented offer a greater understanding of team work processes, together with a target for planning workforce development strategy to sustain resilience in team working.

This preliminary research found that participants in H&SC valued the team as a very important vehicle for building and sustaining resilience when dealing with complex H&SC situations. The capitalisation on the distinction in team type and individual working practices between those of interprofessional and multidisciplinary teams and the model of team learning, may have important consequences for building resilience in H&SC teams. These findings may be significant for workforce educators seeking to develop and build effective practice tools to sustain team working.

The purpose of this paper was to study how psychiatric doctors practise leadership in multidisciplinary healthcare teams. The paper seeks to answer the question: How do psychiatric doctors lead multidisciplinary teams during treatment conferences?

Six psychiatric teams were studied at a university hospital. Each team was observed over a period of 18 months, and data were collected during four years (2008-2011). Data were collected through interviews with doctors (n = 19) and observations (n = 30) of doctors’ work in multidisciplinary psychiatric teams.

Doctors in a multidisciplinary team use either self-imposed or involuntary leadership style. Oscillating between these two extremes was a strategy for handling the internal tensions of the team.

The study was a case study, performed during treatment conferences at psychiatric wards in a university hospital. This limitation means that there is cause for some caution in generalising the results.

The results are useful for understanding leadership in multidisciplinary medical teams. By understanding the reversible logic of leadership, cooperation and knowledge sharing can be gained, which means that a situation of mere peaceful coexistence can be avoided. Understanding the importance of the informal contract makes it possible to switch leadership among team members. A reversible leadership with an informal contract makes the team less vulnerable. The team’s professionals can thus easily handle difficult situations and internal tensions, facilitating leadership and management of multidisciplinary teams.

Doctors in multidisciplinary psychiatric teams use reversible leadership logic.

As part of its restructuring and commitment to collaboration and advances in healthcare, the author's organisation has recently adopted personal outcomes to ensure that services are aligned to meet patient needs more effectively. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate this advancement in healthcare in the light of recent research findings, changing policies and the author's own understanding.

The paper introduces the concept of collaboration as a means of achieving personal outcomes. In addition, the paper puts forward suggestions as to how the nurse can foster interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary teamwork, utilising the core concepts of the advanced nurse practitioner, namely transformational leadership, in support of this.

While success stories of personal outcomes abound much of it anecdotal based. Therefore, the need to initiate research in this area is of paramount importance as the latter would be helpful in examining meaningful quality outcomes. Reform in structure, finance and policy will also be necessary, as these are vital ingredients to the success of personal outcomes. Despite the overlapping conflict of Irish government policy, the extra finance announced in the 2005 Budget can only serve to assist organisations in achieving accreditation through initiatives like personal outcomes. Central to the success of personal outcomes, is to engage in collaborative practice by way of fostering interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary team working.

Further study of the impact on patient outcomes of collaboration is warranted.

The paper examines organisational, professional and interpersonal challenges.

The purpose of this paper is to classify and describe the purpose of ward rounds, who attends each round and their role, and participants’ perception of each other’s role during the respective ward rounds.

A literature review of face-to-face ward rounds in medical wards was conducted. Peer reviewed journals and government publications published between 2000 and 2014 were searched. Articles were classified according to the type of round described in the study. Purposes were identified using keywords in the description of why the round was carried out. Descriptions of tasks and interactions with team members defined participant roles.

Eight round classifications were identified. The most common were the generalised ward; multidisciplinary; and consultant rounds. Multidisciplinary rounds were the most collaborative round. Medical officers were the most likely discipline to attend any round. There was limited reference to allied health clinicians and patient involvement on rounds. Perceptions attendees held of each other reiterated the need to continue to investigate teamwork.

A collaborative approach to care planning can occur by ensuring clinicians and patients are aware of different ward round processes and their role in them.

Analysis fulfils a gap in the literature by identifying and analysing the different ward rounds being undertaken in acute medical wards. It identifies the complexities in the long established routine hospital processes of the ward round.

The purpose of this paper is to explore interprofessional and multidisciplinary working between health and social care practitioners providing services to older people through the prism of how risk is assessed and managed. It proposes that whilst interprofessional and multidisciplinary working is a broad and commonly researched topic, there is a relative paucity of evidence specifically regarding how health and social care practitioners work together across structural, cultural and ideological divides. The study aims to expand the domain of integrated health and social care by including perceptions, understanding and use of the concept of risk by professionals from different disciplines.

This paper is based upon an exploratory study using an interpretivist phenomenological perspective, including 23 semi-structured individual interviews with health and social care practitioners and 2 non-participant observations of multidisciplinary team meetings.

The paper provides empirical insights around the complex dynamics of interprofessional and multidisciplinary working between health and social care practitioners, in particular the saliency of the interconnectedness of individual practitioner Personalities with the Process of interprofessional and multidisciplinary working under the auspices of relevant Policy drivers.

The research was conducted in Wales and, due to the increasingly divergent policy context within the UK, the research results may lack generalisability from a wider UK or international perspective. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the propositions of this research further.

The paper includes implications for both interprofessional and multidisciplinary policy and practice with older people. With new models of integrated care being sought, the findings of this study may offer a timely and valuable contribution, particularly from the inclusion of a social care perspective and in better understanding the interconnectedness of practitioner personalities with process and policy.

This paper fulfils an identified need to study the complex dynamics and interconnectedness between health and social care practitioners who work together to provide services to older people.

Organisations must continually innovate to remain competitive. A by‐product of innovation is new knowledge. In a knowledge economy, an organisation's ability to manage its knowledge can mean the difference between commercial success and failure. A key aspect of being able to manage knowledge is the ability to identify and capture it. This paper aims to present the development of the knowledge‐capture report (KCR) and the results of its use at the third TeamWork demonstration event for collaborative working.

Quantifying the number of discrete pieces of knowledge captured in the KCR and categorising the type and quantity of knowledge captured demonstrate the practicality and effectiveness of the KCR in a dynamic multidisciplinary design team environment.

The different approaches that were observed and adopted by the participants using the KCR highlight a number of key issues that need to be considered when attempting to capture knowledge in a constantly evolving design environment.

The use of the KCR by a wide range of industry practitioners demonstrates a quick, effective and low‐cost approach to capturing project knowledge and events. It could be adopted easily by the engineering and construction (AEC) industry as an entry point to managing knowledge, particularly in complex, multi‐disciplinary design environments.