↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Establishing community-based integrated care for elderly patients through interprofessional teamwork: a qualitative analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
Title
Establishing community-based integrated care for elderly patients through interprofessional teamwork: a qualitative analysis
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, October 2017
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s144526
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tomohiro Asakawa, Hidenobu Kawabata, Kengo Kisa, Takayoshi Terashita, Manabu Murakami, Junji Otaki

Abstract

Working in multidisciplinary teams is indispensable for ensuring high-quality care for elderly people in Japan's rapidly aging society. However, health professionals often experience difficulty collaborating in practice because of their different educational backgrounds, ideas, and the roles of each profession. In this qualitative descriptive study, we reveal how to build interdisciplinary collaboration in multidisciplinary teams. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a total of 26 medical professionals, including physicians, nurses, public health nurses, medical social workers, and clerical personnel. Each participant worked as a team member of community-based integrated care. The central topic of the interviews was what the participants needed to establish collaboration during the care of elderly residents. Each interview lasted for about 60 minutes. All the interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and subjected to content analysis. The analysis yielded the following three categories concerning the necessary elements of building collaboration: 1) two types of meeting configuration; 2) building good communication; and 3) effective leadership. The two meetings described in the first category - "community care meetings" and "individual care meetings" - were aimed at bringing together the disciplines and discussing individual cases, respectively. Building good communication referred to the activities that help professionals understand each other's ideas and roles within community-based integrated care. Effective leadership referred to the presence of two distinctive human resources that could coordinate disciplines and move the team forward to achieve goals. Taken together, our results indicate that these three factors are important for establishing collaborative medical teams according to health professionals. Regular meetings and good communication facilitated by effective leadership can promote collaborative practice and mutual understanding between various professions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 39 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 21 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 41 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,182,390
of 24,394,820 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#232
of 916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,180
of 326,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,394,820 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.