Cited by 36Interprofessional Education and CollaborationInterdisciplinary Research and CollaborationPatient Safety and Medication Errors

An exploratory study of healthcare professionals' perceptions of interprofessional communication and collaboration

Open access
Verhaegh, Kim J., Seller-Boersma, Annamarike, Simons, Robert, Steenbruggen, Jeanet, Geerlings, Suzanne E., de Rooij, Sophia E., Buurman, Bianca M.·2017·Journal of Interprofessional Care

Abstract

Interprofessional communication and collaboration during hospitalisation is critically important to provide safe and effective care. Clinical rounds are an essential interprofessional process in which the clinical problems of patients are discussed on a daily basis. The objective of this exploratory study was to identify healthcare professionals' perspectives on the "ideal" interprofessional round for patients in a university teaching hospital. Three focus groups with medical residents, registered nurses, medical specialists, and quality improvement officers were held. We used a descriptive method of content analysis. The findings indicate that it is important for professionals to consider how team members and patients are involved in the decision-making process during the clinical round and how current social and spatial structures can affect communication and collaboration between the healthcare team and the patient. Specific aspects of communication and collaboration are identified for improving effective interprofessional communication and collaboration during rounds.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13561820.2017.1289158

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verhaegh, K. J., Seller-Boersma, A., Simons, R., Steenbruggen, J., Geerlings, S. E., de Rooij, S. E., & Buurman, B. M.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Geriatric Medicine, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Corresponding author
Verhaegh, Kim J.
Venue
Journal of Interprofessional Care
Published
2017-03-07
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
397-400
ISSN
  • 1356-1820 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-9567
OpenAlex
W2592515142
Cited by
36
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2
FWCI
3.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Interprofessional Care (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
Keywords
interprofessional communication, interprofessional collaboration, clinical rounds, healthcare professionals' perceptions, shared decision-making, patient involvement, hospital teamwork, teaching hospitals, medical residents, registered nurses, specialist physicians
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Cooperative Behavior, Decision Making, Group Processes, Health Personnel, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Patient Care Team, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review