The relationship between clients' motivation and interprofessional teamwork in forensic mental health settings.

Client motivation is regarded as a key to preventing violence behavior and positively affecting both patients and treatment staff in forensic psychiatric settings. We examined the correlation between client motivation for medical treatment and the quality of interprofessional teamwork. We surveyed 18 hospitalized forensic psychiatric patients using the IMI-J and CSQ-8J and 18 interprofessional teams from various professions using the r-CPAT, 6 and 12 months after the initial treatment. At 6 months, the correlation coefficients between the total r-CPAT scores and the total IMI-J and CSQ-8J scores were not significant. At 12 months, the correlation coefficients between the total r-CPAT scores and the total IMI-J or CSQ-8J scores were .33 and .11, respectively. The findings indicate that both clients' motivation and the quality of treatment provided by the interprofessional team improved over time. However, this study also showed that the professionals' subjective evaluation of the quality of interprofessional teamwork did not correlate with clients' subjective evaluation of satisfaction. In order to achieve client satisfaction, it is essential for professionals to address clients' needs in a timely manner and to prioritize effective communication to facilitate patient decision-making rather than merely providing advice.

Framework development for the assessment of interprofessional teamwork in mental health settings.

In mental health settings, interprofessional practice is regarded as a comprehensive approach to prevent relapse and manage chronic conditions with practice of various teamwork interventions. To reinforce the potential of interprofessional teamwork, it is recommended that theories or conceptual frameworks be employed. There continues, however, to be a limited use of such approaches that assess the quality of interprofessional teamwork in mental health settings. This article aimed to present a new conceptual framework for the assessment of interprofessional teamwork based on the findings of a scoping review of the literature. This review was undertaken to identify conceptual frameworks utilised in interprofessional teamwork in mental health settings. After reviewing 952 articles, the methodological characteristics extracted from 12 articles were considered. The included studies were synthesised into the Donabedian structure-process-outcome model. The findings revealed that structural issues comprised three elements: professional characteristics, client-care characteristics, and contextual characteristics in organisations. Process issues comprised two elements: team mechanisms and community-oriented services. Finally, outcome issues comprised the following elements: clients' outcomes and professionals' outcomes. The review findings suggested possibilities for further development of how to assess the quality of interprofessional teamwork and provided information about what specific approach is required to improve interprofessional teamwork. Future research should utilise various areas and cultures to clarify the adaptation potential.

Validation of a global scale to assess the quality of interprofessional teamwork in mental health settings.

BACKGROUND: Few scales currently exist to assess the quality of interprofessional teamwork through team members' perceptions of working together in mental health settings. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to revise and validate an interprofessional scale to assess the quality of teamwork in inpatient psychiatric units and to use it multi-nationally. METHODS: A literature review was undertaken to identify evaluative teamwork tools and develop an additional 12 items to ensure a broad global focus. Focus group discussions considered adaptation to different care systems using subjective judgements from 11 participants in a pre-test of items. Data quality, construct validity, reproducibility, and internal consistency were investigated in the survey using an international comparative design. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis yielded five factors with 21 items: 'patient/community centred care', 'collaborative communication', 'interprofessional conflict', 'role clarification', and 'environment'. High overall internal consistency, reproducibility, adequate face validity, and reasonable construct validity were shown in the USA and Japan. CONCLUSIONS: The revised Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool (CPAT) is a valid measure to assess the quality of interprofessional teamwork in psychiatry and identifies the best strategies to improve team performance. Furthermore, the revised scale will generate more rigorous evidence for collaborative practice in psychiatry internationally.

The development and validation of an interprofessional scale to assess teamwork in mental health settings.

Currently, no evaluative scale exists to assess the quality of interprofessional teamwork in mental health settings across the globe. As a result, little is known about the detailed process of team development within this setting. The purpose of this study is to develop and validate a global interprofessional scale that assesses teamwork in mental health settings using an international comparative study based in Japan and the United States. This report provides a description of this study and reports progress made to date. Specifically, it outlines work on literature reviews to identify evaluative teamwork tools as well as identify relevant teamwork models and theories. It also outlines plans for empirical work that will be undertaken in both Japan and the United States.