Dynamic and distributed exchanges: an interview study of interprofessional communication in rehabilitation

References

• Pethybridge J. How team working influences discharge planning from hospital: a study of four multi-disciplinary teams in an acute hospital in England. J Interprof Care. 2004;18(1):29–41.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reader TW, Flin R, Cuthbertson BH. Communication skills and error in the intensive care unit. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2007;13(6):732–736.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varpio L, Hall P, Lingard L, et al. Interprofessional communication and medical error: a reframing of research questions and approaches. Acad Med. 2008;83(10 Suppl):S76–S81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paxino J, Denniston C, Woodward-Kron R, et al. Communication in interprofessional rehabilitation teams: a scoping review. Disabil Rehabil. 2020;2020:1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson A, Worrall L, Sherratt S. The impact of communication disability on interdisciplinary discussion in rehabilitation case conferences. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(22):1795–1807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Development of nationally consistent subacute and non-acute admitted patient care data definitions and guidelines. In: Welfare AIoHa, editor. 2013. Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/01d815ba-3d66-48c9-a9ec-aaa5825c19f2/15425.pdf.aspx?inline=true
   Google Scholar
• Papadimitriou C, Cott C. Client-centred practices and work in inpatient rehabilitation teams: results from four case studies. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(13):1135–1143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair LB, Lingard LA, Mohabeer RN. What’s so great about rehabilitation teams? An ethnographic study of interprofessional collaboration in a rehabilitation unit. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(7):1196–1201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenstein AH, O’Daniel M. Original research: disruptive behavior and clinical outcomes: Perceptions of nurses and physicians: Nurses, physicians, and administrators say that clinicians. Am J Nurs. 2005;105(1):54–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamida NZA, Rasidb SZA, Maonc S, et al. Interprofessional Communication and Interprofessional Collaboration (IPC) among health care professionals. 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Lingard L, Reznick R, Espin S, et al. Team communications in the operating room: talk patterns, sites of tension, and implications for novices. Acad Med. 2002;77(3):232–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pryor J. A nursing perspective on the relationship between nursing and allied health in inpatient rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30(4):314–322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Digby R, Bolster D, Hughes L, et al. Examining subacute nurses’ roles in a changing healthcare context [nursing homes & residential care 3377]. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(13–14):2260–2274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Digby R, Bolster D, Perta A, et al. The perspective of allied health staff on the role of nurses in subacute care. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(21–22):4089–4099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller K-L, Kontos PC. The intraprofessional and interprofessional relations of neurorehabilitation nurses: a negotiated order perspective. J Adv Nurs. 2013;69(8):1797–1807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long AF, Kneafsey R, Ryan J, et al. The role of the nurse within the multi-professional rehabilitation team. J Adv Nurs. 2002;37(1):70–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalley J, Sim J. Nurses’ perceptions of physiotherapists as rehabilitation team members. Clin Rehabil. 2001;15(4):380–389.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coombs M, Ersser SJ. Medical hegemony in decision‐making–a barrier to interdisciplinary working in intensive care? J Adv Nurs. 2004;46(3):245–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varpio L, Teunissen P. Leadership in interprofessional healthcare teams: empowering knotworking with followership. Med Teach. 2021;43(1):32–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves S, Nelson S, Zwarenstein M. The doctor-nurse game in the age of interprofessional care: a view from Canada. Nurs Inq. 2008;15(1):1–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves S, Lewin S. Interprofessional collaboration in the hospital: strategies and meanings. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004;9(4):218–225.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Croker A, Trede F, Higgs J. Collaboration: What is it like? – Phenomenological interpretation of the experience of collaborating within rehabilitation teams. J Interprof Care. 2012;26(1):13–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyson SF, Greenhalgh J, Long AF, et al. The influence of objective measurement tools on communication and clinical decision making in neurological rehabilitation. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012;18(2):216–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abreu BC, Zhang L, Seale G, et al. Interdisciplinary meetings: investigating the collaboration between persons with brain injury and treatment teams. Brain Inj. 2002;16(8):691–704.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Careau E, Vincent C, Noreau L. Assessing interprofessional teamwork in a videoconference-based telerehabilitation setting. J Telemed Telecare. 2008;14(8):427–434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke DJ. Achieving teamwork in stroke units: the contribution of opportunistic dialogue. J Interprof Care. 2010;24(3):285–297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bull MJ, Roberts J. Components of a proper hospital discharge for elders. J Adv Nurs. 2001;35(4):571–581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth W-M, Radford L, LaCroix L. Working with cultural-historical activity theory. Forum Qual Sozialforsch/Forum. 2012;13(2):1814..
   Google Scholar
• Engeström Y, Pyörälä E. Using activity theory to transform medical work and learning. Med Teach. 2021;43(1):7–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeström Y. Expertise in transition: expansive learning in medical work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Cole M, Engeström Y. A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. Distrib Cognit. 1993;1993:1–46.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström Y. Innovative learning in work teams: analyzing cycles of knowledge creation. In: Engeström Y, Miettinen R, Raija-Leena P, editors. Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999. p. 377–404.
   Google Scholar
• Lingard L, McDougall A, Levstik M, et al. Representing complexity well: a story about teamwork, with implications for how we teach collaboration. Med Educ. 2012;46(9):869–877.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns E, Fenwick J, Schmied V, et al. Reflexivity in midwifery research: the insider/outsider debate. Midwifery. 2012;28(1):52–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen L. Research methods in education, 6th ed. London and New York: Routledge; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(13):1753–1760.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bampton R, Cowton CJ. The e-interview. forum qualitative sozialforschung/forum. Qual Soc Res. 2002;3(2):848.
   Google Scholar
• Patton MQ. Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: a personal, experiential perspective. Qual Social Work. 2002;1(3):261–283.
   Google Scholar
• Bearman M. Eliciting rich data: a practical approach to writing semi-structured interview schedules. Focus on health professional education: a multi-disciplinary. FoHPE. 2019;20(3):1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Umoquit M, Tso P, Varga-Atkins T, et al. Diagrammatic elicitation: defining the use of diagrams in data collection. Qual Report. 2013;18(30):1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks J, McCluskey S, Turley E, et al. The utility of template analysis in qualitative psychology research. Qual Res Psychol. 2015;12(2):202–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King N. Doing template analysis. Qual Organizat Res. 2012;426:77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström Y, Miettinen R, Punamäki-Gitai, et al. Perspectives on activity theory. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1991. (Pea RSB, John; Hawkins, Jan, editor. Learning in doing).
   Google Scholar
• Gibbon B. An investigation of interprofessional collaboration in stroke rehabilitation team conferences. J Clin Nurs. 1999;8(3):246–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• March JG. The pursuit of organizational intelligence: decisions and learning in organizations. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell Publishers, Inc.; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Mehan H. Institutional decision-making. In: Rogoff B, Lave J, editors. Everyday cognition: its development in social context. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1984. p. 41–66.
   Google Scholar
• Kajamaa A. Boundary breaking in a hospital: expansive learning between the worlds of evaluation and frontline work. Learn Organizat. 2011;18(5):361–377.
   Google Scholar
• Akkerman SF, Bakker A. Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Rev Educ Res. 2011;81(2):132–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett M, Oborn E. Boundary object use in cross-cultural software development teams. Human Relat. 2010;63(8):1199–1221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington DD. The dynamics of material artifacts in collaborative research teams. Comput Supported Coop Work. 2010;19(2):175–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leblebici H, Salancik GR, Copay A, et al. Institutional change and the transformation of interorganizational fields: an organizational history of the US radio broadcasting industry. Admin Sci Quart. 1991;36(3):333–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott WR, Ruef M, Mendel PJ, et al. Institutional change and healthcare organizations: from professional dominance to managed care. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Brown B. Brene with Priya Parker on how we return and why it matters, part 1. In: Brown B, editor. Dare to Lead. 2021; [cited 2021 May 17]. Available from: https://brenebrown.com/podcast/brene-with-priya-parker-on-how-we-return-and-why-it-matters-part-1-of-2/:Parcast
   Google Scholar
• Ellingson LL. Interdisciplinary health care teamwork in the clinic backstage. J Appl Commun Res. 2003;31(2):93–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss AL. Negotiations: varieties, contexts, processes, and social order. Vol. 1. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass San Francisco; 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss AL, Fagerhaugh S, Suczek B, et al. Social organization of medical work. New York: Routledge; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Eskola A. Laws, logics, and human activity. Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999. p. 107–114.
   Google Scholar