Practitioners' validation of framework of team-oriented practice models in integrative health care: a mixed methods study

Isabelle Gaboury, Heather Boon, Marja Verhoef, Mathieu Bujold, Laurent M Lapierre, David Moher, Isabelle Gaboury, Heather Boon, Marja Verhoef, Mathieu Bujold, Laurent M Lapierre, David Moher

Abstract

Background: Biomedical and Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) academic and clinical communities have yet to arrive at a common understanding of what Integrative healthcare (IHC) is and how it is practiced. The Models of Team Health Care Practice (MTHP) framework is a conceptual representation of seven possible practice models of health care within which teams of practitioners could elect to practice IHC, from an organizational perspective. The models range from parallel practice at one end to integrative practice at the other end. Models differ theoretically, based on a series of hypotheses. To date, this framework has not been empirically validated. This paper aims to test nine hypotheses in an attempt to validate the MTHP framework.

Methods: Secondary analysis of two studies carried out by the same research team was conducted, using a mixed methods approach. Data were collected from both biomedical and CAM practitioners working in Canadian IHC clinics. The secondary analysis is based on 21 participants in the qualitative study and 87 in the quantitative study.

Results: We identified three groups among the initial seven models in the MTHP framework. Differences between practitioners working in different practice models were found chiefly between those who thought that their clinics represented an integrative model, versus those who perceived their clinics to represent a parallel or consultative model. Of the scales used in the analysis, only the process of information sharing varied significantly across all three groups of models.

Conclusions: The MTHP framework should be used with caution to guide the evaluation of the impact of team-oriented practice models on both subjective and objective outcomes of IHC. Groups of models may be more useful, because clinics may not "fit" under a single model when more than one model of collaboration occurs at a single site. The addition of a hypothesis regarding power relationships between practitioners should be considered. Further validation is required so that integrative practice models are well described with appropriate terminology, thus facilitating the work of health care practitioners, managers, policy makers and researchers.

References

    1. Boon H, Verhoef M, O'Hara D, Findlay B, Majid N. Integrative healthcare: arriving at a working definition.[see comment]. [Review] [54 refs] Altern Ther Health Med. 2004;10:48–56.
    1. Micozzi MS. In: Fundamentals of Complementary and Integrative Medicine. 3. Micozzi MS, editor. St-Louis: Saunders Elsevier; 2006. Issues in Integrative Medicine; pp. 18–23.
    1. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. CAM in the US. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2005. Integration of CAM and Conventional Medicine; pp. 196–225.
    1. Block KI. On models for integrative medical practice. Integr Cancer Ther. 2007;6:309–312. doi: 10.1177/1534735407310180.
    1. Stumpf SH, Shapiro SJ, Hardy ML. Divining integrative medicine. Evid Based Complement Altern Med. 2007.
    1. Boon H, Verhoef M, O'Hara D, Findlay B. From parallel practice to integrative health care: a conceptual framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2004;4:15. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-4-15.
    1. Hollenberg D. Uncharted ground: patterns of professional interaction among complementary/alternative and biomedical practitioners in integrative health care settings. Soc Sci Med. 2006;62:731–744. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.030.
    1. Gaboury I, Bujold M, Boon H, Moher D. Interprofessional collaboration within Canadian integrative health care clinics: key components. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69:707–715. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.05.048.
    1. Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. Mixed methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1998.
    1. McGrath JE. Social Psychology: a brief introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1964.
    1. Tresolini CP, Pew-Fetzer Task Force. Health Professions Education and Relationship-Centered Care. San Francisco, CA: Pew Health Professions Commission; 1994. Ref Type: Report.
    1. Gaboury I, Lapierre L, Boon H, Moher D. Interprofessional collaboration within Canadian integrative health care clinics through the lens of the Relationship-centered care model. J Interprof Care. 2010.
    1. Boyatzis RE. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1998.
    1. Conover WJ. Practical nonparametric Statistics. 3. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1999.
    1. Cummings SM, Savitz LA, Konrad TR. Reported response rates to mailed physician questionnaires. Health Serv Res. 2001;35:1347–1355.
    1. Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:1129–1136. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00126-1.
    1. Kellerman SE, Herold J. Physician response to surveys. A review of the literature. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20:61–67. doi: 10.1016/S0749-3797(00)00258-0.
    1. Szabo V, Strang VR. Secondary analysis of qualitative data. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 1997;20:66–74.
    1. Sicotte C, D'Amour D, Moreault MP. Interdisciplinary collaboration within Quebec Community Health Care Centres. Soc Sci Med. 2002;55:991–1003. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00232-5.
    1. Hsiao AF, Hays RD, Ryan GW, Coulter ID, Andersen RM, Hardy ML. et al.A Self-Report Measure of Clinicians' Orientation toward Integrative Medicine. Health Serv Res. 2005;40:1553–1569. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00425.x.
    1. Cook J, Wall T. New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology. 1980;53:39–52.
    1. Van den Hooff B, De Ridder JA. In: Social capital and information technology. Huysman MH, Wulf V, editor. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2004. Exploring the eagerness to share knowledge: The role of ICT and social capital of knowledge sharing; pp. 163–186.
    1. Heinemann GD, Schmitt MH, Farrell MP, Brallier SA. Development of an Attitudes Toward Health Care Teams Scale. Eval Health Prof. 1999;22:123–142. doi: 10.1177/01632789922034202.
    1. Cammann C, Fichman M, Jenkins D, Klesh J. In: Assessing organizational change: A guide to methods, measures and practices. Seashore S, Lawler E, Mirvis P, Cammann C, editor. New York: John Wiley; 1983. Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members; p. 84.
    1. Hackman JR, Oldman GR. The Job Diagnostic Survey: An instrument for the diagnostis of job redesign projects. 4. 1974. New Haven, CT, Yale University, Department of Administrative Sciences; Ref Type: Report.
    1. Bishop JW, Scott KD, Burroughs SM. Support, Commitment, and Employee Outcomes in a Team Environment. Journal of Management. 2000;26:1113–1132. doi: 10.1177/014920630002600603.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi