LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Taanila, Anja; Purola, Helena; Larivaara, Pekka (2012)
Publisher: Co-Action Publishing
Journal: International Journal of Circumpolar Health
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: experimental education, interprofessional education, co-operative competence, family orientation, interprofessional collaboration
Objectives. A two-year family-oriented interprofessional education programme for professionals working in the field of primary services (e.g. health care, social welfare, school, day care) was started in the Province of Oulu, Finland in 2000. The programme aimed to provide the participants (n=76) with skills to work with families in interprofessional collaboration. The study investigated the views and working methods of all the 14 nurses who participated in the course. Study design. Qualitative study employing the content analysis method. Methods. The data were collected by using open-ended questions at the beginning and at the end of the education and analysed with the method of content analysis. Results. Initially, the nurses were aware of the significance and the premises of family-oriented interprofessional collaboration, but seldom implemented them in practice. At the end of the programme, their working methods had changed from expert- to client- and family-oriented direction. They began to appreciate interprofessional collaboration and found that client- and familyoriented working methods supported families’ own resources. Conclusions. In order to change the theoretical framework and practical working methods of the professionals a sufficiently long process of education is needed where the interprofessional collaboration is put into practice already during the education. Even though this education programme was developed and implemented for professionals working in the primary social and health care services in the Northern Finland, we believe that it is applicable to the teaching of interprofessional collaboration in different settings in different countries.(Int J Circumpolar Health 2006:65(3):206-218.)Keywords: experimental education, interprofessional education, co-operative competence, family orientation, interprofessional collaboration
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Ohinmaa A, Näyhä S, k oivukangas P, Ahonen G, Hassi J. Väestön odotettavissa oleva aktiiviaika ja sen alue-erot Suomessa (Expected active time of population and its regional differences in Finland). Suom Lääkäril 1996; 12: 1321-1327. [In Finnish]
    • 2. Näyhä S, Järvelin M-R. Health trends in Northern Finland. Int J Circumpolar Health 1998; 57: 94- 103.
    • 3. Lahelma E. Sosiaaliluokan ja sairastavuuden suhde suomalaisilla miehillä ja naisilla. (Relationship between social class and morbidity among Finnish men and women). Suom Lääkäril 1991; 28: 29-39. [In Finnish]
    • 4. McDaniel S, Cambell T, Lorenz A. Family-oriented primary care. Second edition. Spinger, New York, 2004.
    • 5. Paukkunen L. Sosiaali- ja terveysalan yhteistyöosaamisen kehittäminen: k oulutuskokeilun arviointitutkimus. k uopion yliopisto, k uopion yliopiston julkaisuja E, Yhteiskuntatieteet 103, 2003. (Development of collaborative competence in social and health care: assessment of experimental education. University of k uopio, k uopio University Publications E, Social Sciences 103, 2003). [In Finnish]
    • 6. Launis k . Asiantuntijoiden yhteistyö perusterveydenhuollossa. k äsityksiä ja arkikäytäntöjä. (Collaboration of experts in primary care: conceptions and practice) Tutkimuksia 50. STAk ES. (Summary in English), 1994. [In Finnish]
    • 7. Suosalo E. Moniammatillisuus haaste alueelliselle väestövastuulle. Oulun yliopisto, Hoitotieteen laitos. (Multidisciplinary: a challenge in community care. University of Oulu, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Nursing). (Abstract in English), 1997. [In Finnish]
    • 8. Øvretveit J. Coordinating community care. Multidisciplinary teams and care management. Open University Press, Buckingham, 1993.
    • 9. Annadale E, Clark J, Allen E. Interprofessional working: an ethnographic case study of emergency health care. J Interprof Care 1999; 13:139-150.
    • 10. Hutchinson A, Cordon S. Primary care teamwork - making it a reality. J Interprof Care 1992; 6: 31- 42.
    • 11. Freeth D. Sustaining interprofessional collaboration. J Interprof Care 2001; 15: 36-46.
    • 12. Partis M. A multidisciplinary education project in primary care. Br J Community Nurs 2001; 6: 68- 73.
    • 13. Henneman E, Lee J, Cohen J. Collaboration: a concept analysis. J Adv Nurs 1995; 21: 103-109.
    • 14. Taanila A, Larivaara P, k orpio A, k alliokoski R. Evaluation of a family-centred continuing medical education course for general practitioners. Med Educ 2002; 36: 248-257.
    • 15. Whall A, Fawcett J. The family as a focal phenomenon in nursing. In A Whall, J Fowcett J, eds. Family theory development in nursing state of the science and art. Davis Company, Philadelphia, 1991; 7-29.
    • 16. Engel GL. The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science 1977; 196: 129-136.
    • 17. Burr V. An introduction to social constructionism. Routledge, London, 1995.
    • 18. Doherty W. The ways and the levels of collaboration. Fam Syst Med 1995; 13: 275-281.
    • 19. Caldock k . Policy and practice: fundamental contradictions in the conceptualization of community care for elderly people? Health and Social Care in the Communicaty 1994; 2: 133-141.
    • 20. Glaserfeld (von) E. A constructivist approach to teaching. In L Steffe, J Gale, eds. Constructivism in education, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1995.
    • 21. Jarvis P. Adult and continuing education. Theory and practice. Routledge, London, 1988.
    • 22. Bertalanffy L. General system theory: foundations, development, applications. George Braziller, New York, 1968.
    • 23. Hoffman L. Foundations of family therapy. Basic Books, New York, 1981.
    • 24. Burns N, Grove S. The Practice of Nursing Research. Conduct, Critique & Utilization. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, 1997.
    • 25. Polit DF, Hungler BP. Nursing research. Principles and methods. Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1995.
    • 26. Miles M, Huberman A. Qualitative data analysis. Sage, Galifornia, 1994.
    • 27. Borgen D, Pollard D, Amundson N, WestWood M. Employment groups: the counselling connection. Lugus, Toronto, 1989.
    • 28. Williams G. Four factors for effective team work in primary health care. 2nd International conference on Community. Health Nursing Research 1997; 8: 13-15.
    • 29. Larivaara P, Taanila A. Towards interprofessional family-oriented teamwork in primary services: the evaluation of an education programme. J Interprof Care 2004; 18: 153-163.
    • 30. Long S. Primary health care team workshop: team members' perspectives. J Adv Nurs 1996; 23: 935- 941.
    • 31. Vogt J, Griffith S. Team Development and Proactive Change: Theory and Training Implications. Organization Journal. Winter, 1988; 81-87.
    • 32. Burns N. Standards for Qualitative Research. Nursing Sciences Quarterly 1989; 2(1): 44-52.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Collected from