Team Interactions in Specialized Palliative Care Teams: A Qualitative Study
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Teamwork is a standard of care in palliative care and that is emphasized by leading organizations. When interdisciplinary teams communicate their varied assessments, outcomes may be more than additive due to the synthesis of information. Interprofessionality does not guarantee multidimensionality in health care interventions, however, and that interprofessional teams promote collaboration may be questioned. AIM: The aim was to explore team interaction among team members in specialized palliative care teams. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews were conducted with health professionals working in specialized palliative home care teams. The interviews were analyzed by content analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants were recruited from specialized palliative care units in Sweden. The 15 interviewees included 4 men and 11 women. Physcians, nurses, paramedical staff, and social workers were included. RESULTS: Organizational issues like resources and leadership have a great impact on delivery of care. Competence was mirrored in education, collaboration, approach, and support within the team; while communication was described as key to being a team, resolving conflict, and executing palliative care. CONCLUSION: Communication and communication patterns within the team create the feeling of being a team. Team climate and team performance are significantly impacted by knowledge and trust of competence in colleagues, with other professions, and by the available leadership. Proportions of different health professionals in the team have an impact on the focus and delivery of care. Interprofessional education giving clarity on one's own professional role and knowledge of other professions would most likely benefit patients and family caregivers.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Employees hoped that managers would be supportive even if they were not from the same profession.
“Employees hoped that managers would be supportive even if they were not from the same profession (Klarare et al. 2013).”
From Leadership of Nurses' Interprofessional Collaboration: A Mixed‐Methods Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Klarare et al. 2013
The core practice of establishing an enhancing atmosphere consists of creating and maintaining a working environment, fostering patient-centred care, and maintaining a positive perception of the nursing profession.
“This core practice consists of the following sub-practices: creating and maintaining a working environment (Cordeiro Trajano et al. 2017;Ika et al. 2019;Klarare et al. 2013;Nazari et al. 2018;Rioux-Dubois and Perron 2023;Wei et al. 2020), fostering patient-centred care (Costa et al. 2014;Folkman et al. 2019;Malapela 2024), and maintaining a positive perception of the nursing profession (Cordeiro”
From Leadership of Nurses' Interprofessional Collaboration: A Mixed‐Methods Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Klarare et al. 2013
Managers selected new employees based not only on experience but also on how well they fit with the team to preserve the atmosphere.
“Managers also selected new employees based not only on experience but also on how well they fit with the team to preserve the atmosphere (Klarare et al. 2013).”
From Leadership of Nurses' Interprofessional Collaboration: A Mixed‐Methods Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Klarare et al. 2013
A positive attitude to facilitate and lead groups enhances interprofessional collaboration.
“Positive attitude to facilitate and lead groups”
From Leadership of Nurses' Interprofessional Collaboration: A Mixed‐Methods Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Klarare et al. 2013
Creating team atmosphere enhances interprofessional collaboration.
“Creating team atmosphere”
From Leadership of Nurses' Interprofessional Collaboration: A Mixed‐Methods Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Klarare et al. 2013
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 27 · Cited by 98
- Authors
- Klarare, A., Hagelin, C. L., Fürst, C. J., & Fossum, B.
- Affiliations
- Sophiahemmet University College (SE)
- Lund University (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Klarare, Anna
- Venue
- Journal of Palliative Medicine
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-09
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1062-1069
- ISSN
- 1096-6218 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7740
- OpenAlex
- W2093022974
- Cited by
- 98
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 11.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- urn.kb.se
- Locations
- Journal of Palliative Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
- Keywords
- palliative care team, interprofessional collaboration, team communication, team climate, leadership, professional competence, team trust, conflict resolution, home care teams, interdisciplinary teams, interprofessional education, professional roles
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Clinical Competence, Communication, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Leadership, Male, Middle Aged, Palliative Care, Patient Care Team, Sweden, Professional Role, Trust, 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