Clinical Interdisciplinary Collaboration Models and Frameworks From Similarities to Differences: A Systematic Review


  •  Mousa Mahdizadeh    
  •  Abbas Heydari    
  •  Hossien Karimi Moonaghi    

Abstract

Introduction: So far, various models of interdisciplinary collaboration in clinical nursing have been presented, however, yet a comprehensive model is not available. The purpose of this study is to review the evidences that had presented model or framework with qualitative approach about interdisciplinary collaboration in clinical nursing.

Methods: All the articles and theses published from 1990 to 10 June 2014 which in both English and Persian models or frameworks of clinicians had presented model or framework of clinical collaboration were searched using databases of Proquest, Scopus, pub Med, Science Direct, and Iranian databases of Sid, Magiran, and Iranmedex. In this review, for published articles and theses, keywords according with MESH such as nurse-physician relations, care team, collaboration, interdisciplinary relations and their Persian equivalents were used.

Results: In this study contexts, processes and outcomes of interdisciplinary collaboration as findings were extracted. One of the major components affecting on collaboration that most of the models had emphasized was background of collaboration. Most of studies suggested that the outcome of collaboration were improved care, doctors and nurses' satisfaction, controlling costs, reducing clinical errors and patient's safety.

Conclusion: Models and frameworks had different structures, backgrounds, and conditions, but the outcomes were similar. Organizational structure, culture and social factors are important aspects of clinical collaboration. So it is necessary to improve the quality and effectiveness of clinical collaboration these factors to be considered.



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
  • Issn(Print): 1916-9736
  • Issn(Onlne): 1916-9744
  • Started: 2009
  • Frequency: monthly

Journal Metrics

Google-based Impact Factor (2017): 1.84

h-index (June 2018): 32

i10-index (June 2018): 105

h5-index (June 2018): 23

h5-median(June 2018): 28

RG Journal impact: 1.26

Contact