Editorial / Editorial

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> Interprofessional teamwork among healthcare professionals in healthcare organizations is a key factor for both their job satisfaction and patients’ effective and efficient treatment. One precondition for successful interprofessional teamwork is a shared mental model (a common cognitive frame of reference and knowledge) of working together as a team. However, there often exist subcultures, and each of these has its own mental model of teamwork. Hence, it can be assumed that different healthcare professional groups do not share the evaluation of their interprofessional teamwork and job satisfaction (Hypothesis 1). Additionally, based on the input-process-output model of team effectiveness, it can be expected that interprofessional teamwork determines job satisfaction (Hypothesis 2). These hypotheses were tested in a survey of 272 employees in 15 rehabilitation clinics in Germany. Results showed that healthcare professionals’ evaluation of their interprofessional teamwork (F(3, 203) = 9.118, p &lt; 0.001, η2 = 0.119) as well as their job satisfaction (F(3, 210) = 3.357, p = 0.02, η2 = 0.046) differed significantly. Physicians reported the highest level of interprofessional teamwork and job satisfaction compared with other groups. Perceptions of interprofessional teamwork explain approximately 20% of the variance in job satisfaction. Thus, both hypotheses were confirmed. Interprofessional interventions in education and practice are recommended to establish a shared mental model, which could improve teamwork and subsequently job satisfaction.</abstract>

Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Medical Faculty

Department of Occupational and Consumer Psychology, Institute of Psychology

Department of Rehabilitation Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology

Healthcare professionals’ evaluation of interprofessional teamwork and job satisfaction / Evaluation der Teamarbeit und der Arbeitszufriedenheit von Gesundheitsfachberufen

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Contemporary conditions require health professionals both to employ published evidence in their individual practices and as a profession to produce valid evidence of their outcome effectiveness. Heretofore, these two processes of evidence-based practice have often been confounded as one. This theoretical paper separates the two processes into «Evidence-Supported Practice» and «Evidence-Informed Practice.» Each requires a different approach to evidence accumulation and use. Nonetheless, the two processes can and should be interlinked. For external (research) evidence, the research pyramid model values equally the internal and external validity of studies, as both are important for the implementation of external evidence. Furthermore, external evidence must be combined with internal evidence (data generated in the course of interaction with a client) in the decision-making of practitioners. Examples from recent research on occupational therapy practice and literature from several other health professions are cited for illustration. This paper formulates a more comprehensive model for evidence-based practice. From this model follow specific recommendations for practitioners, researchers, and educators in the health professions. </abstract>

Decision-Making and Sources of Evidence in Occupational Therapy and Other Health Professions. Evidence-Informed Practice / Entscheidungsfindung und Evidenzquellen in der Ergotherapie und weiteren Gesundheitsberufen. Evidenzinformierte Praxis

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The article focuses on topics, approaches, and methodological perspectives of qualitative intervention research developing within an experimental science-oriented research environment. Recent stroke rehabilitation studies from physical, occupational and speechlanguage therapy and nursing sciences predominantly utilize qualitative content summary, largely without reference to established qualitative research approaches. A majority of these studies is characterized by inventories of topics covered by research participants in interviews and focus groups. Based on existing typologies of qualitative findings, opportunities for developing the complexity and explanatory power of qualitative intervention research are discussed. A more thorough methodological foundation and quality control are important tasks for future development. </abstract>

Qualitative studies investigating the effectiveness of stroke rehabilitation - methodological approaches and perspectives / Qualitative Studien zur Wirkung therapeutischer Interventionen – methodische Zugänge und Perspektiven am Beispiel Schlaganfallrehabilitation

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Implementing evidence-based innovations into care practice is a complex, slow and haphazard process. Dissemination and implementation (DI) research seeks to understand and optimize that process, to close gaps between research and practice and to improve quality of care. While there is a growing body of international DI research, little is known about the number and types of DI research studies and the DI topics studied in German-speaking nursing settings. This scoping review therefore evaluates the state of nursing-related DI research in German-speaking countries, discusses these results in light of the international state of DI research and provides directions for future research. We searched international databases (Web of Knowledge including Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and GeroLit), German library meta-search engines, six German-language key trade journals, and reference lists of included articles. In total, 186 references representing 140 research projects were included in our review. Quality appraisal used five validated checklists. Methodological quality of the included studies was generally low. A total of 92 studies assessed the effects of DI strategies, 67 studied DI barriers and facilitators, 64 evaluated the impact or characteristics of DI processes, and 5 reported on the development or validation of DI research tools. None of the included studies focussed on methodological questions of DI research or on development and testing of DI theories and models. Future nursing-related DI research in German-speaking countries should particularly focus on these latter topics. Taking into account the international state of DI research will be especially crucial for those research activities.</abstract>

Knowledge Utilization Studies Program, Faculty of Nursing

Institute of Health and Nursing Sciences, Medical Faculty

Martin- Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg

German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)

Department of Nursing Science, Faculty of Health

Division of Nursing Science and Nursing Pedagogics, Ministry of Health, Equalities, Care and Ageing

Department of Nursing and Management, Faculty of Business and Social Sciences

German Institute for Economic Research (DIW)

Scoping review of nursing-related dissemination and implementation research in German-speaking countries: Mapping the field / Scoping Review zum Stand der pflegebezogenen Disseminations- und Implementierungsforschung in deutschsprachigen Ländern: eine Bestandsaufnahme

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Clinical assessments should meet the general psychometric properties of reliability and validity. Furthermore there are requirements in matters of diagnostic validity and usability. In regards to patients with severe brain damage, both issues can mainly be implemented by detecting and assessing returning abilities as early as possible, in order to use them for treatment planning. Main aim of this article is to investigate whether the newly developed and validated interprofessional Basel Vegetative State Assessment (BAVESTA) meets these practice criteria.Data were collected as part of validity assessment of BAVESTA. Using the Glasgow Coma Scale as a reference, predictive parameters and measures of effect are calculated. Moreover, expert users were interviewed and results are presented in a descriptive way. With a sensitivity of .84 and a specificity of .85, the BAVESTA can be regarded as suitable in differentiating between Vegetative State and further states of remission such as the Minimally Conscious State.Expert users regard BAVESTA as eligible for mapping rehabilitative process of patients with severely impaired consciousness. They agree upon the fact that all relevant areas are covered by BAVESTA.The BAVESTA displays high levels of differentiation, in regards to both sensitivity and specificity. However, measures of effect ought generally to be regarded with caution, as reference standards have not been developed for the area of rehabilitation. Considering time expenditure, BAVESTA is rated as only marginally feasible by expert users.It should be continued to investigate BAVESTA in regards to its diagnostic quality, integrating electrophysical diagnostic tools as reference standards. </abstract>

Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften

Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel

Fakultät für Psychologie, Abteilung klinische Psychologie und Psychiatrie

Diagnostic Validity of the Basler Vegetative State Assessment - BAVESTA / Diagnostische Validität des Basler Vegetative State Assessments - BAVESTA

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The key criteria for identification of pressure ulcer risk are mobility and activity. In practice and research, it is currently not possible to assess these criteria with reliable instruments. New technical methods allow a quantified metric measurement of the mobility of patients lying in bed. However, it is unclear how to interpret such data. Therefore, the aim of this systematized literature review was to identify (i) reference values for frequencies of movements during sleep, and (ii) critical values for the clinical diagnosis of pressure ulcer risk. A literature search was conducted in the MedLine, CINAHL, Trip Database, the Cochrane Library, PEDro, Google Scholar databases and by handsearching the reference lists of eligible manuscripts for the period 2008-2013. One review and nine primary studies were selected. Pressure ulcer risk studies showed poor methodological quality while they showed a high heterogeneity of the measurement methods for the detection of movement during sleep. This observed heterogeneity did not allow to compare the study results. Less studies reported reference values compared to studies reporting correlations with pathological conditions such as sleep quality and pressure ulcer risk. After critically reviewing the studies, no valid data on the frequency of movement during sleep and on critical values for the clinical diagnosis of pressure ulcer risk was found. To interpret the results of a new measurement method and its efficacy, more diagnostic studies and high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed. </abstract>

Frequency of movement in bed to assess risk of pressure ulcer – A systematized review / Häufigkeit von Bewegung im Bett zur Einschätzung der Dekubitusgefährdung – Eine systematisierte Übersichtsarbeit

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 11 (2024): Issue 1 (January 2024)

Volume 10 (2023): Issue 1 (January 2023)

Volume 9 (2022): Issue 1 (January 2022)

Volume 8 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)

Volume 7 (2020): Issue 1 (January 2020)

Volume 6 (2019): Issue 1 (January 2019)

Volume 5 (2018): Issue 1 (January 2018)

Volume 4 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

Volume 4 (2017): Issue 1 (June 2017)

Volume 3 (2016): Issue 2 (December 2016)

Volume 3 (2016): Issue 1 (June 2016)

Volume 2 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)

Volume 2 (2015): Issue 1 (June 2015)

Volume 1 (2014): Issue 1 (December 2014)

International Journal of Health Professions

The International Journal of Health Professions (IJHP) is an academic journal with principle focus on interdisciplinary and interprofessional collaboration of health professionals in research, practice and education. IJHP calls for original articles on health professions and health care issues with an interdisciplinary/ interprofessional perspective in the areas of:   patient's perspective and participation, user involvement in interprofessional health care  decision making science and evidence in health care  studies of interprofessional collaboration in practice; problem-based and case-based collaboration; error management and culture of constructive criticism in interprofessional collaboration  interfaces in sequential collaboration (patient pathways, treatment chain)  cooperation and innovation in integrated health care, managed care, case management, e-health  interdisciplinary clinical studies, assessments, outcomes  health promotion and functioning in daily life from an interdisciplinary perspective  Innovation in interdisciplinary research methods  health policy, health economics with reference to interdisciplinary/ interprofessional topics  higher education didactics and educational topics  The IJHP publishes research studies, reviews, theoretical and methodological foundations and analyses.  Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process.   OTHER LINKS:Online Submission of Manuscripts - http://www.editorialmanager.com/ijhpEditorial Policy (English) - https://ijhp.info/en/author-information/Instructions for Authors (English) - https://ijhp.info/en/author-information/Journal Homepage (English) - https://ijhp.info/en/  Peer Review  Submitted manuscripts go through a two-step process:  Firstly, the editorial board will decide whether the manuscript fulfils the substantive and formal criteria for the further review process. The decision is based on the following criteria:    Relevance: the content conforms to the scope and goals of the IJHP  Originality/topicality: the content is sufficiently important and topical to merit publication in the IJHP  Formal correctness: the formal criteria are met.  Ethical Guidelines: national and international ethical standards for studies with human subjects are fulfilled (where applicable).   When the criteria are not met, the manuscript will be rejected without peer review. The authors have the opportunity to resubmit the manuscript after rigorous revision.  When the criteria are met, the manuscript is assigned to a responsible editor who will organize a double blind peer review process. Two reviewers receive the manuscript with a cover sheet excluding the names and affiliated institutions of the authors. No further measures to anonymize the document are carried out. The authors do not know the names of the reviewers.  Once all reviews have been received and considered by the responsible editor, the corresponding author receives an e-mail with the decision. The following decisions are possible:    Accepted without revision  Accepted , minor or major revision required  Rejected  Article Processing Charges APCs, publication fees  The IJHP does not charge any fees for submitting, editing, or publishing articles. The Verein zur Förderung der Wissenschaft in den Gesundheitsberufen VFWG (Association for the Promotion of Science in the Health Professions VFWG) thus promotes scientific publication activity in the academic health professions (esp. in German-speaking countries). 