Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Interprofessional collaboration among care professionals in obstetrical care: are perceptions aligned?
  1. Anita Romijn1,
  2. Pim W Teunissen2,
  3. Martine C de Bruijne1,
  4. Cordula Wagner1,3,
  5. Christianne J M de Groot2
  1. 1 Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  3. 3 Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Anita Romijn, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, VU University Medical Center, 1081 BT Amsterdam, Netherlands; a.romijn{at}vumc.nl

Abstract

Background In an obstetrical team, obstetricians, midwives and nurses work together in a dynamic and complex care setting. Different professional cultures can be a barrier for effective interprofessional collaboration. Although the different professional cultures in obstetrical care are well known, little is understood about discrepancies in mutual perceptions of collaboration. Similar perceptions of collaboration are important to ensure patient safety. We aimed to understand how different care professionals in an obstetrical team assess interprofessional collaboration in order to gain insight into the extent to which their perceptions are aligned.

Methods This cross-sectional study was performed in the north-western region of the Netherlands. Care professionals from five hospitals and surrounding primary-care midwifery practices were surveyed. The respondents consisted of four groups of care professionals: obstetricians (n=74), hospital-based midwives known as clinical midwives (n=42), nurses (n=154) and primary-care midwives (n=109). The overall response rate was 80.8%. We used the Interprofessional Collaboration Measurement Scale (IPCMS) to assess perceived interprofessional collaboration. The IPCMS distinguishes three subscales: communication, accommodation and isolation. Data were analysed using non-parametrical tests.

Results Overall, ratings of interprofessional collaboration were good. Obstetricians rated their collaboration with clinical midwives, nurses and primary-care midwives more positively than these three groups rated the collaboration with obstetricians. Discrepancies in mutual perceptions were most apparent in the isolation subscale, which is about sharing opinions, discussing new practices and respecting each other.

Conclusion We found relevant discrepancies in mutual perceptions of collaboration in obstetrical care in the Netherlands. Obstetrical care is currently being reorganised to enable more integrated care, which will have consequences for interprofessional collaboration. The findings of this study indicate opportunities for improvement especially in terms of perceived isolation.

  • Obstetrics And Gynecology
  • Patient Safety
  • Attitudes

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors All authors made contributions to the design of the study. AR carried out data collection, performed statistical analyses, interpreted results and drafted the manuscript. PWT, MCdB, CW and CJMdG made contributions to interpretation of the data and revisions to the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

  • Funding This study was supported by ZonMw, the Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development - grant number 209020001.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval Medical Ethical Committee of the VU University Medical Center (Amsterdam, The Netherlands).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.