Communication and Inter-professional Work in Nursing

Communication and Inter-professional persist in NursingDiscuss how communicating within an inter-professional team could impinge on collaborative operative.WORD COUNTS 1650IntroductionThe aim of this essay is to discuss the construct of discourse within Interprofessional team, critically analysing how this could affect collaborative working and with punctilious attention given to two find points good dialogue in call of verbal, non-verbal and active listening and the development of mutual sureness and respect. It will endeavour to critically examine the impact these key points and the impact they brace on the dynamics of collaborative working. It will also seek to search strategies that may be used to facilitate in effect(p) colloquy and coaction amongst professionals.Modern wellnessc atomic number 18 is becoming ever complex out-of-pocket to the aging population, versatile range of co-morbidities and increasing expectations of health service role and safety (Wo rld Health Organisation, 2011). Hence, in that respect is exerting growing pressure on health and well-disposed c atomic number 18 providers to deliver manage that is effective so to join forces these demands. Pollard, Thomas and Miers (2010) advocates that in order for health and social care professionals to be able to cope with these demand, they have to work together as a team. For instance, during the hospital stay of a patient , they may encounter many professionals from diverse disciplines much(prenominal) as doctors, nurses, pharmacists, dieticians, physiotherapists, social workers and many more depending on the patients needs, therefore, professionals will need to collaborate together expeditiously as a team.Collaboration requires professionals from different disciplines in health and social care to work together as a team by sharing of knowledge, ideas, expertise, resources and responsibility in order to tackle the most touchy health and social care issues and make effective clinical decisions regarding a patients care (ref). In turn, collaboration also ensures concurrence in quality care for their patients, subsequently, improves services and outcomes (Social Care engraft for Excellence, 2015). However, for this to occur, effective conference is needed for a successful collaboration to be achieved (Brock et al., 2013) which is in line with the 6 Cs of care as highlighted in the Department of Health (2015) guideline. . In agreement, ODaniel Rosenstein (2008) insist that communication forms the lynchpin of collaborative working and when omiting or incompetent compromises a sticking collaborative team.Wood (2004) defines communication as a systemic do by in which individualists interact with and through symbols to create and interpret meanings (p.9). Nemeth (2008) affirms that for communication to transpirate among individuals it has to be effective and not the mere fact of interaction, as effective communication entails the transmis sion of development uninterrupted that results to understanding. Effective communication is argued, the key ingredient for the successfulness of interprofessional collaborative working within health and social care (NHS Commissioning Board, 2013). Hargestam, Lindkvist, Brulin, Jacobsson and Hultin (2013) barely emphasised that communication is the key factor for the prerequisite for the teams structure, collaboration and task performance. Alfredsottir and Bjornsdottir (2008) perpetrate forth the notion that where there is effective communication within a team, there is also good clinical outcomes. Kenny (2002) also suggests that positive collaboration alongside effective communication ensures sufficient sharing of valuable roll in the hay and expertise, thus, enhances levels of job felicity. In support, Almost et al. (2015) review of positive and negative conducts in workplace relationships among healthcare members found that improved communication and teamwork reduces stress, increases job satisfaction and work performance in turn enhances communication between team members.Jerry (2011) ascertains that there are two major components of communication used within health and social care verbal and non-verbal communication. Verbal communication involves professionals showdown face-to-face in the form of meetings or over the telephone which are one of the most common and preferred way of communication. This allows sharing of knowledge and skills, generating common narrative that draws team together. Jerry (2011) further illustrates that during this phase of communication, members should speak distinctly and directly in a succinct manner while conscription from their own knowledge, warranting free functioning and efficient culture thus avoiding errors of miscommunication and confusion. On reflection during MDT meetings in clinical placement, each member was given the luck to make critical points that endorsed other members to bring in ideas and make res pectable decisions. Browning and Waite (2010) however acknowledge that active listening plays a major role in verbal communication as it is the pedigree for a successful interaction, hence sustaining collaborative working among healthcare professional.Burnard and Gill (2013) further declares that how well professionals communicate is also dependent on non-verbal communication such as written notes, care plans, letters, pleading of eye contact during meetings as they are key factors that enhances or detracts from the way professionals communicate. Fiske (2011) stresses that where there is lack of listening skills or clarity of information world transmitted, this often leads to potential conflicts and confusion to bone as a result of ambiguity or reception of means not being fully understood or misinterpreted. (ref) supports this stating that, when there is sectionalisation in communication, it hinders the efficiency and leads to insufficient information, ambiguous and unclear in formation being exchanged between professionals, consequently jeopardising the dynamics of collaboration. In their qualitative count of multidisciplinary communication at ward board rounds, Hellier et al. (2015) found that ineffective communication amongst healthcare professionals correlates with lack of appropriate information being available, conclusions often not reached and decisions of patients often deferred. A teach by Wu et al (2012) suggests that, where discrepancies in the flow of information between professional were found to lead to misunderstandings and frustrations among healthcare teams which meant communication and cohesion barriers were formed (Burnard Gill, 2013).ODaniel and Rosenstein (2008) further accentuate that barriers to effective communication may be due to members from different profession having varied behavior and language affiliation part due to training, therefore, sets up the potential for miscommunication. Hence, Lingard (2012) advocates that pa ltry communication shapes events that impact on professional working and patients downstream. Nonetheless, Wu et al. (2012) stated that when there is strong communication within a team, professionals are adequately inform as all members of a team are kept updated as they are in the loop of the information they need, hence a like common inter-professional language is established (Reeves, Lewin, Espin Zwarenstein, 2010).All the same, there is an array of literatures and cases that shows that communication and collaboration does not always occur in clinical practice. The mutual Commission (2010) found that an estimated 80% of serious preventable adverse events stems from miscommunication between caregivers. The detrimental effects of communication deficiency between professionals were evident in the Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust report (Francis, 2013). Central to the analysis of the Francis (2013) report was the try of egregious failings of communication between health professionals and organisations. The report showed that the quality of information exchange was often poor or failed to be passed on between hospitals, thereby affecting the way professionals interacted, delivery of services and patient care (Zwarenstein, Goldman Reeves, 2009). Devastating cases such as this illustrates the necessity of optimising communication among Interprofessional teams.Kenny (2002) illustrates that effective communication is the platform that creates transparency, encouraging professionals to develop trust, respect and form good working relationships where communication becomes more open and effective (Burnard Gill, 2013). This is in conjunction with McDonald, Jayasuriya and Harris (2012) qualitative findings of the influence of power dynamics and trust on multidisciplinary collaboration of diverse health professionals. Findings suggest that when effective communication is established especially through shared experience, technical skills and competence, opportunities for professional to rapport, gain mutual respect and trust is developed, thereby, forming alliance among professionals that facilitate cooperation.Result of the thematic analysis correlates with the authors own experience observed in the classroom during Interprofessional education (IPE), as the author was able to work efficiently and show mutual consider to other students from other health educational sector such as pharmacy, child nursing and mental health nursing once effective communication had been established (Keller, Eggenberger ,Belkowitz, Sarsekeyeva Zito, 2013). This ensured that task sets out by the lecturer were achieved as everyone took turn to contribute and allowed ideas and decisions to be rigorously debated. Dixon-Woods et al. (2013) qualitative findings of culture and behaviour in the English National Health Service (NHS) among physicians, nurses and administrators accentuated that where there was lack of trust and mutual respect this led to lack of support, appreci ation of individual professional expertise. Findings also showed that some professionals were not being consulted or listened to which created conflicts, discrepancy and miscommunication (Leonard, Graham Bonacum, 2004). The trustworthiness and reliability of the findings within the choose is questionable as the researchers failed to provide full details of the methods used to collect data. However, findings was consistent with that of Ferlie and Shortell (2001) study which showed that where there was lack of trust and mutual respect between health professionals, there was deterrent to quality improvement work and on how well they communicated.ODaniel and Rosenstein (2008) maintain that barriers to communication that affects collaboration between health professionals gage be bridged by the use of a standardised communication stool. NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement (2012) recommended that healthcare professionals implement a standardised overture to communicate such as the use of SBAR to make certain that information shared is structured by being concise and focused to maintain consistency of high quality of care. Randmaa, Mrtensson, Swenne and Engstrm (2013) prospective disturbance study identified that SBAR improves communication between healthcare professionals, a similarity of incidents report due to communication errors decreasing from 31% to 11%. The study also highlighted that the tool sets out expectations between health professionals of how they should communicate. In terms of the limitation of this study, participants were not chosen at random which questions the studys reliability.ConclusionEvidence gathered suggests that effective communication and collaboration is positive and should be used in correlation impetuously by professionals, thus to foster high quality care and promote practice to the highest calibre.1 Page