What do practitioners think? A qualitative study of a shared care mental health and nutrition primary care program

Abstract Objective To develop an in-depth understanding of a shared care model from primary mental health and nutrition care practitioners with a focus on program goals, strengths, challenges and target population benefits. Design Qualitative method of focus groups. Setting/Participants The study involved fifty-three practitioners from the Hamilton Health Service Organization Mental Health and Nutrition Program located in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Method Six focus groups were conducted to obtain the perspective of practitioners belonging to various disciplines or health care teams. A qualitative approach using both an editing and template organization styles was taken followed by a basic content analysis. Main findings Themes revealed accessibility, interdisciplinary care, and complex care as the main goals of the program. Major program strengths included flexibility, communication/collaboration, educational opportunities, access to patient information, continuity of care, and maintenance of practitioner and patient satisfaction. Shared care was described as highly dependent on communication style, skill and expertise, availability, and attitudes toward shared care. Time constraint with respect to collaboration was noted as the main challenge. Conclusion Despite some challenges and variability among practices, the program was perceived as providing better patient care by the most appropriate practitioner in an accessible and comfortable setting.

[1]  Donna Mead,et al.  The learning curve: the advantages and disadvantages in the use of focus groups as a method of data collection. , 2004, Nurse researcher.

[2]  S. Vaughn,et al.  Focus Group Interviews in Education and Psychology , 1996 .

[3]  P. Liamputtong,et al.  Book Reviews: 'Health Promotion: Planning and Strategies', 'Sustainability and Health: Supporting global ecological integrityin public health', 'Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd edition)' , 2005 .

[4]  M. West,et al.  The determinants of effectiveness in primary health care teams , 1999 .

[5]  A Conceptual Framework for Working Relationships Among Disciplines and the Place of Interdisciplinary Education and Practice , 1994 .

[6]  E. Kuipers,et al.  Integration between primary and secondary services in the care of the severely mentally ill: patients' and general practitioners' views , 1997, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[7]  D. Mechanic,et al.  Approaches for coordinating primary and specialty care for persons with mental illness. , 1997, General hospital psychiatry.

[8]  M. West,et al.  Effective multidisciplinary teamwork in primary health care. , 1993, Journal of advanced nursing.

[9]  L. Bickman Resolving issues raised by the Fort Bragg evaluation. New directions for mental health services research. , 1997, American Psychologist.

[10]  Anton J. Kuzel,et al.  Sampling in qualitative inquiry. , 1992 .

[11]  M. Patton Qualitative research & evaluation methods , 2002 .

[12]  M D Ray,et al.  Shared borders: achieving the goals of interdisciplinary patient care. , 1998, American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

[13]  J. Sim Focus Group Interviews in Education and Psychology , 1996 .

[14]  Leslie J. Cooksy,et al.  The Program Logic Model as an Integrative Framework for a Multimethod Evaluation , 2001 .

[15]  J. Dyer Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary, and Transdisciplinary Educational Models and Nursing Education , 2003, Nursing education perspectives.

[16]  L. Nash,et al.  Shared Mental Health Care in Canada , 1997, Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie.

[17]  M. Lorentzon Doing Qualitative Research , 1993 .

[18]  C. Webb,et al.  Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nurse education. , 2001, Nurse education today.

[19]  G. Strathdee Primary care-psychiatry interaction: a British perspective. , 1987, General hospital psychiatry.

[20]  A. Petrosino Answering the Why Question in Evaluation: The Causal-Model Approach , 2000, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation.

[21]  J. Kitzinger,et al.  Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups , 1995 .