University of Westminster, London, UK.
University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
J Interprof Care. 2024 Nov-Dec;38(6):974-984. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2024.2405550. Epub 2024 Nov 17.
In this first of three papers, we seek to understand how the new "integrated care" global policy directive, pursuing greater alignment for health and social care systems, will be translated into preparation for practice concerning interprofessional education (IPE) from pre-to-post registration level and for continuing professional development. We ask questions about the implications for leaders and practitioners in the field of IPE and collaborative practice (CP). In seeking to understand this new global policy directive, we explore the plethora of definitions, concepts and perspectives, continuously evolving and at times counterproductive as they try to synthesize complexity, to describe how health and social care systems and practitioners work together. We trace research on how integrated care is understood drawing upon transnational current understandings of integrated working in North America, Europe and the UK. We ask questions of the ambitions of integrated care aligned to forging closer working relationships between health and social care practitioners to tackle modern complex healthcare challenges. In reading the literature we have sought to identify the themes which emerge to direct the field of IPE and CP so that the workforce is prepared to deliver care, as policy makers intended, within locally designed new innovative care systems. We conclude that it remains unclear as to whether these new policy aspirations will achieve the connectivity required, for a supported workforce, committed to working together to deliver care envisaged to help people experiencing complex long-term conditions, disadvantage and health inequalities. In our second paper, we review the developmental pathway for IPE, taking a closer look at preparation for integrated care pathways and collaborative practice, seeking evidence to guide us. Finally, in our third paper, we turn our attention to the implications for the workforce composition, dynamics, and relationships, exploring heightened progressive ever-changing roles and responsibilities, focusing on social work.
在这三篇论文中的第一篇中,我们试图了解新的“综合护理”全球政策指令——追求使卫生和社会保健系统更加协调一致——将如何转化为从注册前到注册后各级别的跨专业教育(IPE)和继续专业发展的准备工作。我们询问了IPE 和协作实践(CP)领域的领导者和从业者的相关问题。在试图理解这一新的全球政策指令时,我们探讨了众多定义、概念和观点,这些定义、概念和观点不断演变,有时甚至适得其反,因为它们试图综合复杂性,描述卫生和社会保健系统以及从业者如何共同工作。我们追踪了有关综合护理的理解的研究,借鉴了北美、欧洲和英国跨国界对综合工作的当前理解。我们对与医疗保健系统的卫生和社会保健从业者建立更紧密的工作关系以应对现代复杂医疗保健挑战的综合护理的雄心提出了疑问。在阅读文献时,我们试图确定主题,以指导 IPE 和 CP 领域,以便工作人员能够按照政策制定者的意图,在当地设计的新创新护理系统中提供护理。我们的结论是,尚不清楚这些新的政策愿望是否会实现所需的连接性,以支持致力于共同提供护理的工作人员,为帮助那些患有复杂的长期疾病、处于劣势地位和存在健康不平等的人提供护理。在我们的第二篇论文中,我们回顾了 IPE 的发展途径,更仔细地研究了综合护理途径和协作实践的准备情况,寻求指导我们的证据。最后,在我们的第三篇论文中,我们将注意力转向劳动力构成、动态和关系的影响,探索不断变化的角色和责任,重点关注社会工作。