Cited by 229Interprofessional Education and CollaborationNursing education and managementNursing Roles and Practices

Interdisciplinary Communication and Collaboration Among Physicians, Nurses, and Unlicensed Assistive Personnel

Lancaster, Gwendolyn, Kolakowsky‐Hayner, Stephanie, Kovacich, Joann, Greer‐Williams, Nancy·2015·Journal of Nursing Scholarship

Abstract

Purpose: Historically, health care has primarily focused on physician, nurse, and allied healthcare provider triads. Using a phenomenological approach, this study explores the potential for hospital‐based interdisciplinary care provided by physicians, nurses, and unlicensed assistive personnel (UAPs). Design: This phenomenological study used a purposive nonprobability, criterion‐based, convenience sample from a metropolitan hospital. Theoretical Foundation: Malhotra's (1981) Schutzian lifeworld phenomenological orchestra study provided the theoretical basis for the conductorless orchestra model, which guided this study. In an orchestra, each member sees and hears the musical score from a different vantage point or perspective and has a different stock of knowledge or talent; however, members work together to produce a cohesive performance. Like the orchestra, individual talents and perspectives of physicians, nurses, and UAPs can be collaboratively blended to create a symphony: enhanced patient‐centered care. Methods: Qualitative semistructured face‐to‐face, individual interviews were carefully transcribed and coded with the aid of NVivo 9, a qualitative data analysis software program, to discover emergent patterns and themes. Findings: The study suggests that most of the time physicians, nurses, and UAPs operate as separate healthcare providers who barely speak to each other. Physicians see themselves as the primary patient care decision makers. Many physicians acknowledge the importance of nurses’ knowledge and expertise. On the other hand, the study indicates a hierarchical, subservient relationship among nurses and UAPs. Physicians and nurses tend to work together or consult each other at times, but UAPs are rarely included in any type of meaningful patient discussion. Conclusions: Since physicians, nurses, and UAPs each provide portions of patient care, coordination of the various treatments and interventions provided is critical to prevent errors and fragmentation of care. Tensions, misunderstandings, and conflicts caused by differences of opinions and interests can interfere with effective interdisciplinary communications and collaboration. Improving patient safety in the hospital requires addressing the current hierarchical professional structure inherent in healthcare delivery. A hospital patient care model based on the conductorless orchestra model would mitigate hierarchy; recognize physician, nurse, and UAP contributions to care; promote improved communication and collaboration; and enhance patient safety. Clinical Relevance: Study results provide additional information supporting interdisciplinary communication and collaboration education and training among physicians, nurses, and UAPs to support positive patient care outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jnu.12130

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Patient care has been found to be compromised when nurses and doctors work in isolation to each other with ineffective communication, especially within hierarchical authority structures where clinicians are seen as the primary clinical decision-maker for a patient.

    “Patient care has been found to be compromised when nurses and doctors work in isolation to each other with ineffective communication with each other, especially within hierarchical authority structures where clinicians are seen as the primary clinical decision-maker for a patient [30,31].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lancaster, G., Kolakowsky‐Hayner, S., Kovacich, J., & Greer‐Williams, N.
Affiliations
  • Assistant Nursing Care Coordinator, <i>Omicron Delta</i> Mount Sinai St. Luke's Hospital New York NY
  • Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (US)
  • University of Phoenix (US)
  • University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (US)
Venue
Journal of Nursing Scholarship
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03-19
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
275-284
ISSN
  • 0363-2792 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-6546
  • 1547-5069
OpenAlex
W1935857750
Cited by
229
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 2
FWCI
33.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Nursing Scholarship (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing education and management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Nursing Roles and Practices
Keywords
interdisciplinary communication, interdisciplinary collaboration, unlicensed assistive personnel, nurse-physician relationship, hospital care teams, hierarchy in healthcare, patient safety, patient-centered care, care fragmentation
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Communication Barriers, Cooperative Behavior, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Male, Medical Staff, Hospital, Middle Aged, Nurses, Patient Care Team, Surveys and Questionnaires, Physician-Nurse Relations, Professional Role, Interdisciplinary Communication, 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