What matters in low-threshold collaboration? Perceptions of interprofessional collaboration between education and social and healthcare professionals in Finnish primary schools

Figures & data

Table 1. Participants’ characteristics (a condensed list of professions).

		N	%
Gender	Female	173	87.4
	Male	25	12.6
	Not known	7	3.4
Age	20–29	23	11.2
	30–39	49	23.9
	40–49	54	26.3
	50–59	58	28.3
	60 <	21	10.2
Organisation	Education	128	62.4
	Social office	14	6.8
	Health office	17	8.3
	Social and health district	46	22.4
Profession	Teacher (class)	47	22.9
	Teacher (special education)	15	7.2
	Education assistant	12	5.8
	Head teacher	13	6.3
	Social worker (school)	29	14.1
	Social worker; social work (child and family services)	26	12.6
	Psychologist	16	7.8
	Nurse (school)	34	16.6
	Other professions (doctor, nurse, youth coach, head of services)	9	4.3
Total		205	100%

Table 2. PINCOM-Q items and factors.

Dimensions	PINCOM-Q Items
Factor 1	Individual motivators for collaboration	Mean	Mdn	SD
Individ. level/Motivation (a)	I find working in interprofessional groups valuable	2.0	1.0	1.777
Individ. level/Motivation (c)	It is important to be personally engaged when (c) collaborating in interprofessional groups	2.3	2.0	1.682
Individ. level/Motivation (d)	I experience personal growth when I work in interprofessional groups (d)	2.6	2.0	1.631
Group level/Leadership (a)	I often experience that effective interprofessional groups have a clear and defined leader.	2.5	2.0	1.610
Group level/Leadership (b)	It is important that the group leader arrange the work in ways that help the group reach their goals	2.5	2.0	1.635
Group level/Leadership (d)	I trust that the group leader will ensure the interest of the group	2.7	2.0	1.512
Group level/Social support (c)	I find that I am appreciated by other professionals in the interprofessional groups I participate in	2.8	2.0	1.531
Org. Level/Org. Environment (a)	The needs of the clients are very important for how we work in interprofessional groups	2.5	2.0	1.656
Factor 2	Communication and collaboration skills
Group level/Communication (c)	There is always good communication in interprofessional groups	3.4	3.0	1.455
Group level/Communication (d)	Professionals are good at exchanging information with each other about how they work	3.8	4.0	1.564
Group level/Communication (b)	In the interprofessional groups I participate in, exchange of information is never a problem	3.8	4.0	1.786
Group level/Coping abilities (b)	There are seldom collaboration problems in interprofessional groups	3.3	3.0	1.522
Group level/Coping abilities (a)	We almost always solve the defined problems in the interprofessional group	3.4	3.0	1.503
Factor 3	Conflicts and individual style
Individ. level/Personal style (b)	If some professionals had greater insight into their behavior, collaboration would be easier	3.7	4.0	1.826
Individ. level/Personal power (a)	Some professionals dominate the interprofessional meetings with their professional viewpoints	3.5	3.0	1.700
Individ. level/Personal power (c)	Sometimes I am not able to present my perspectives because other high-status professionals talk all the time.	4.5	5.0	1.971
Individ. level/Personal power (d)	Occasionally interprofessional groups do not work because some professionals dominate the meetings	4.2	4.0	1.899
Org. level/Org. Environment (d)	It is often difficult to get interprofessional groups to work well because professionals represent so many different interests	3.9	4.0	1.674

Table 3. Exploratory factor analysis of three-factor model of PINCOM-Q.

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient	.92	.86	.83
Subscale/Item	Factor 1	Factor 2	Factor 3	Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted
1 Motivation (a)	.94			.89
2 Motivation (c)	.88			.90
3 Motivation (d)	.72			.91
4 Social support (c)	.65			.91
5 Leadership (b)	.71			.91
6 Leadership (d)	.67			.91
7 Leadership (a)	.64			.91
8 Organisational environment (a)	.76			.90
9 Communication (c)		.78		.81
10 Communication (d)		.78		.82
11 Communication (b)		.66		.85
12 Coping abilities (b)		.71		.82
13 Coping abilities (a)		.64		.82
14 Personal style (b)			.60	.82
15 Personal power (d)			.91	.77
16 Personal power (c)			.80	.81
17 Personal power (a)			.66	.81
18 Organisational environment (d)			.61	.81