↓ Skip to main content

The role of boundary spanners in delivering collaborative care: a process evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The role of boundary spanners in delivering collaborative care: a process evaluation
Published in
BMC Family Practice, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12875-016-0501-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carianne M. Hunt, Michael Spence, Anne McBride

Abstract

On average, people with schizophrenia and psychosis die 13-30 years sooner than the general population (World Psychiatry 10 (1):52-77, 2011). Mental and physical health care is often provided by different organisations, different practitioners and in different settings which makes collaborative care difficult. Research is needed to understand and map the impact of new collaborative ways of working at the primary/secondary care interface (PloS One 7 (5); e36468). The evaluation presented in this paper was designed to explore the potential of a Community and Physical Health Co-ordinator role (CPHC) (CPHCs were previously Care Co-ordinators within the Community Mental Health Team, Community in the title CPHC refers to Community Mental Health) and Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) meetings across primary and community care, with the aim of improving collaboration of mental and physical health care for service users with Severe Mental Illness (SMI). Data collection took place across five general practices (GPs) and a Community Mental Health Team (CMHT) in the Northwest of England, as part of a process evaluation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of GP staff (n= 18) and CMHT staff (n=4), a focus group with CMHT staff (n=8) and a survey completed by 13 CMHT staff, alongside cardiovascular risk data and MDT actions. Framework analysis was used to manage and interpret data. The results from the evaluation demonstrate that a CPHC role and MDT meetings are effective mechanisms for improving the collaboration and co-ordination of physical health care for SMI service users. The findings highlight the importance of embedding and supporting the CPHC role, with an emphasis on protected time and continuing professional roles and integrating multiple perspectives through MDT meetings. Considering the importance of physical health care for SMI service users and the complex environment, these are important findings for practitioners, researchers and policy makers in the field of primary care and mental health. There is an increasing focus on integration and collaborative working to ensure the delivery of quality care across the whole patient pathway, with a growing need for professionals to work together across service and professional boundaries. The introduction of a two pronged approach to collaboration has shown some important improvements in the management of physical health care for service users with SMI.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 81 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 18%
Student > Master 12 15%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 17 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 16%
Social Sciences 13 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 18 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 August 2020.
All research outputs
#15,016,497
of 18,750,173 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#1,467
of 1,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,757
of 276,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,750,173 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,782 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them