Background: The number of people suffering from one or more chronic conditions is rising, resulting in an increase in patients with complex health care demands. Interprofessional collaboration and the use of shared care plans support the management of complex health care demands of patients with chronic illnesses. This study aims to get an overview of the scientific literature on developing interprofessional shared care plans. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of the scientific literature regarding the development of interprofessional shared care plans. A systematic database search resulted in 45 articles being included, 5 of which were empirical studies concentrating purely on the care plan. Findings were synthesised using directed content analysis. Results: This review revealed three themes. The first theme was the format of the shared care plan, with the following elements: patient’s current state; goals and concerns; actions and interventions; and evaluation. The second theme concerned the development of shared care plans, and can be categorised as interpersonal, organisational and patient-related factors. The third theme covered tools, whose main function is to support professionals in sharing patient information without personal contact. Such tools relate to documentation of and communication about patient information. Conclusion: Care plan development is not a free-standing concept, but should be seen as the result of an underlying process of interprofessional collaboration between team members, including the patient. To integrate the patients’ perspectives into the care plans, their needs and values need careful consideration. This review indicates a need for new empirical studies examining the development and use of shared care plans and evaluating their effects.
Background: The number of people suffering from one or more chronic conditions is rising, resulting in an increase in patients with complex health care demands. Interprofessional collaboration and the use of shared care plans support the management of complex health care demands of patients with chronic illnesses. This study aims to get an overview of the scientific literature on developing interprofessional shared care plans. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of the scientific literature regarding the development of interprofessional shared care plans. A systematic database search resulted in 45 articles being included, 5 of which were empirical studies concentrating purely on the care plan. Findings were synthesised using directed content analysis. Results: This review revealed three themes. The first theme was the format of the shared care plan, with the following elements: patient’s current state; goals and concerns; actions and interventions; and evaluation. The second theme concerned the development of shared care plans, and can be categorised as interpersonal, organisational and patient-related factors. The third theme covered tools, whose main function is to support professionals in sharing patient information without personal contact. Such tools relate to documentation of and communication about patient information. Conclusion: Care plan development is not a free-standing concept, but should be seen as the result of an underlying process of interprofessional collaboration between team members, including the patient. To integrate the patients’ perspectives into the care plans, their needs and values need careful consideration. This review indicates a need for new empirical studies examining the development and use of shared care plans and evaluating their effects.
Background: As our global population ages, malnutrition and sarcopenia are increasingly prevalent. Given the multifactorial nature of these conditions, effective management of (risk of) malnutrition and sarcopenia necessitates interprofessional collaboration (IPC). This study aimed to understand primary and social care professionals’ barriers, facilitators, preferences, and needs regarding interprofessional management of (risk of) malnutrition and sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We conducted a qualitative, Straussian, grounded theory study. We collected data using online semi-structured focus group interviews. A grounded theory data analysis was performed using open, axial, and selective coding, followed by developing a conceptual model. Results: We conducted five online focus groups with 28 professionals from the primary and social care setting. We identified five selective codes: 1) Information exchange between professionals must be smooth, 2) Regular consultation on the tasks, responsibilities, and extent of IPC is needed; 3) Thorough involvement of older adults in IPC is preferred; 4) Coordination of interprofessional care around the older adult is needed; and 5) IPC must move beyond healthcare systems. Our conceptual model illustrates three interconnected dimensions in interprofessional collaboration: professionals, infrastructure, and older adults. Conclusion: Based on insights from professionals, interprofessional collaboration requires synergy between professionals, infra-structure, and older adults. Professionals need both infrastructure elements and the engagement of older adults for successful interprofessional collaboration.
