Cross-sector collaboration in transitional care of people experiencing homelessness: insights from an exploratory network analysis.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Amanda Joy Anderson, Sanjukta Das Smith, Suzanne S Dickerson, Sharon Hewner, Katia Noyes
{"title":"Cross-sector collaboration in transitional care of people experiencing homelessness: insights from an exploratory network analysis.","authors":"Amanda Joy Anderson, Sanjukta Das Smith, Suzanne S Dickerson, Sharon Hewner, Katia Noyes","doi":"10.1080/13561820.2025.2502594","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interprofessional care coordinators informally collaborate across sectors to facilitate care of patients with multimorbidity and social complexity, such as in the case of ill-housed persons at hospital discharge. The complexity of homeless patients demands research on cross-sector collaborative interventions like medical respite, a cross-sector transitional care model. Relational Coordination (RC) and exploratory social network analysis were used to assess the cross-sector collaboration of a medical respite network (<i>N</i> = 15 organizations), by comparing administrative (<i>n</i> = 20) and frontline care coordinator (<i>n</i> = 41) behavior. Five elements of cross-sector collaboration were measured: collaboration frequency, communication, relationships, coordinating mechanisms, and role attributes. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and surveys; analyzed with UCINet and RC indexing. Collaboration across sectors was evident in all network organizations. Administrative representatives were more connected than frontline (cohesion 0.95; 0.77). Both showed weak RC scores (<3.5 out of 5.0), value on accurate communication, problem-solving communication, and shared goals. Organizations with coordinating mechanisms (shared meetings, contracts, etc.) showed higher centrality <i>and</i> RC scores. Our study suggests ties between administrative and frontline workers and coordinating mechanisms optimize cross-sector collaboration in interprofessional teams. Intraorganizational behavioral differences between administrators and frontline care coordination professionals denote the need for further research individual provider attribute (sector, role, education, licensure) impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":50174,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2025.2502594","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interprofessional care coordinators informally collaborate across sectors to facilitate care of patients with multimorbidity and social complexity, such as in the case of ill-housed persons at hospital discharge. The complexity of homeless patients demands research on cross-sector collaborative interventions like medical respite, a cross-sector transitional care model. Relational Coordination (RC) and exploratory social network analysis were used to assess the cross-sector collaboration of a medical respite network (N = 15 organizations), by comparing administrative (n = 20) and frontline care coordinator (n = 41) behavior. Five elements of cross-sector collaboration were measured: collaboration frequency, communication, relationships, coordinating mechanisms, and role attributes. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and surveys; analyzed with UCINet and RC indexing. Collaboration across sectors was evident in all network organizations. Administrative representatives were more connected than frontline (cohesion 0.95; 0.77). Both showed weak RC scores (<3.5 out of 5.0), value on accurate communication, problem-solving communication, and shared goals. Organizations with coordinating mechanisms (shared meetings, contracts, etc.) showed higher centrality and RC scores. Our study suggests ties between administrative and frontline workers and coordinating mechanisms optimize cross-sector collaboration in interprofessional teams. Intraorganizational behavioral differences between administrators and frontline care coordination professionals denote the need for further research individual provider attribute (sector, role, education, licensure) impact.

无家可归者过渡性护理的跨部门合作:来自探索性网络分析的见解。
跨专业护理协调员非正式地开展跨部门合作,以促进对多重疾病和社会复杂性患者的护理,例如对出院时居住条件恶劣的患者的护理。无家可归患者的复杂性要求研究跨部门合作干预措施,如医疗喘息,一种跨部门过渡护理模式。通过比较行政(N = 20)和一线护理协调员(N = 41)的行为,采用关系协调(RC)和探索性社会网络分析来评估医疗喘息网络(N = 15)的跨部门协作。我们测量了跨部门协作的五个要素:协作频率、沟通、关系、协调机制和角色属性。数据通过半结构化访谈和调查收集;用UCINet和RC索引进行分析。跨部门协作在所有网络组织中都很明显。行政代表的连通性高于一线(凝聚力0.95;0.77)。两者均表现出较弱的RC分数(和RC分数)。我们的研究表明,行政和一线员工之间的联系以及协调机制可以优化跨专业团队的跨部门合作。管理人员和一线护理协调专业人员之间的组织内行为差异表明需要进一步研究个体提供者属性(部门、角色、教育、执照)的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Interprofessional Care
Journal of Interprofessional Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
14.80%
发文量
124
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interprofessional Care disseminates research and new developments in the field of interprofessional education and practice. We welcome contributions containing an explicit interprofessional focus, and involving a range of settings, professions, and fields. Areas of practice covered include primary, community and hospital care, health education and public health, and beyond health and social care into fields such as criminal justice and primary/elementary education. Papers introducing additional interprofessional views, for example, from a community development or environmental design perspective, are welcome. The Journal is disseminated internationally and encourages submissions from around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信