NURS 8002 Blog How Do You Practice Intra- and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Practice?

NURS 8002 Blog How Do You Practice Intra- and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Practice?

NURS 8002 Blog How Do You Practice Intra- and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Practice? You are the DNP-prepared nurse responsible for overseeing a large intensive care unit (ICU). You have noticed that in the last 3 months, the number of nosocomial, or hospital-acquired infections (HAIs), has dramatically increased among patients who have undergone cardiovascular procedures. You would like to initiate a practice study to determine the source of these HAIs and to improve patient outcomes in your ICU.

Photo Credit: Andrey Popov / Adobe Stock

What types of interdisciplinary collaboration might be needed to support the goals of your practice study?

As outlined in the scenario, the likelihood to engage in interdisciplinary collaboration to enhance healthcare delivery and nursing

NURS 8002 Blog How Do You Practice Intra- and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Practice
NURS 8002 Blog How Do You Practice Intra- and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Practice

practice is high. In fact, it is likely that the DNP-prepared nurse in the scenario presented may need to collaborate with an infection prevention specialist (who may be a PhD-prepared nurse or PhD-credentialed healthcare professional). While this represents only one potential area in which interprofessional collaboration may take place in advanced nursing practice, it is important to keep in mind that when disciplines work together toward a shared goal that focuses on the patient, the quality and cost of care delivered will be optimized (Johnson & Johnson, 2016).

For this Blog Assignment, review the Learning Resources and reflect on strategies that may be used to foster interdisciplinary collaboration in nursing practice. Reflect on strategies and approaches you might recommend that support interdisciplinary collaboration in practice.

To prepare:

Review the Henry et. al. (2018) article in this week’s Learning Resources about collaboration through case study design.
Reflect on how the approach of case study design may apply toward fostering intra- and interdisciplinary collaboration in practice.
Select at least one of the articles from this week’s Learning Resources and reflect on how professional collaboration is executed to address the needs described in the article.
Reflect on your own experiences with intra- and interdisciplinary collaboration in your practice.
By Day 3 of Week 6

Post a response to your Blog describing your own experiences with intra- and interdisciplinary collaboration in your practice. What were the strengths and weaknesses of this collaboration? How might your own experiences mirror the perspectives and viewpoints presented in the Henry et al. (2018) case study design approach? Be specific and provide examples.

By Day 5 of Week 6

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by expanding on your colleague’s post or suggesting an alternative viewpoint/perspective on the experiences described by your colleagues.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 6 Blog Rubric

Post by Day 3 of Week 6 and Respond by Day 5 of Week 6

To Participate in this Blog:

Week 6 Blog

What’s Coming Up in Week 7?

Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images

Next week, you will evaluate community and organizational needs, challenges, and issues. You will then examine the role of the DNP-prepared nurse in addressing and advocating for community and organizational needs, challenges, and issues.

Next Week

To go to the next week:

Week 7

Week 6: The Doctorally Prepared Nurse: Professional Collaboration

As a nurse with a DNP, there is a good chance that you will work with people from other fields. In fact, you may already find that you work with other people like this every day. In the modern system for providing health care, team-based approaches are more often used to come up with treatment plans that not only meet a patient’s needs but also help them live longer and better lives. How do you plan to work with people from other fields in your nursing practice?

This week, you will look at how nurses work together across and within different fields. You will also think about the pros and cons of working with people from different fields in nursing practice.

Learning Objectives

Students will:

Analyze intra- and interdisciplinary collaboration in nursing practice
Analyze strengths and weaknesses of interdisciplinary collaboration in nursing practice
Learning Resources

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8002 Blog How Do You Practice Intra- and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Practice?
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

Ansa, B. E., Zechariah, S., Gates, A. M., Johnson, S. W., Heboyan, V., & De Leo, G. (2020). Attitudes and behavior towards interprofessional collaboration among healthcare professionals in a large academic medical center. Healthcare, 8(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8030323

Celio, J., Ninane, F., Bugnon, O., & Schneider, M. P. (2018). Pharmacist-nurse collaborations in medication adherence-enhancing interventions: A review. Patient Education and Counseling, 101(7), 1175–1192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2018.01.022

Contandriopoulos, D., Brousselle, A., Dubois, C.-A., Perroux, M., Beaulieu, M.-D., Brault, I., Kilpatrick, K., D’Amour, D., & Sansgter-Gormley, E. (2015). A process-based framework to guide nurse practitioners integration into primary healthcare teams: Results from a logic analysis. BMC Health Services Research, 15(78), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0731-5

Henry, B., Male, B., Garner, C., & Guernon, A. (2018). Teaching and learning about interprofessional collaboration through student-designed case study and analysis. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 30(3), 560–570.

Interprofessional Education Collaborative. (2016). Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: 2016 update. https://hsc.unm.edu/ipe/resources/ipec-2016-core-competencies.pdf

Muller, C., Hesjedal-Streller, B., Fleischmann, N., Tetzlaff, B., Mallon, T., Scherer, M., Kopke, S., Balzer, K., Gartner, L., Maurer, I., Friede, T., Konig, H.-H., & Hummers, E. (2020). Effects of strategies to improve general practitioner-nurse collaboration and communication in regard to hospital admissions of nursing home residents (interprof ACT): Study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial. Trials, 21(913), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04736-x

National League for Nursing. (2015). Interprofessional collaboration in education and practice. http://www.nln.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/ipe-ipp-vision.pdf?sfvrsn=14

Module 3: Collaboration and the DNP Community of Practice

Interprofessional collaboration, or coordinating care between various disciplines, has resulted in widespread reduction of inefficiencies in patient care. As it applies to nursing practice, cooperative work allows for more effective treatment plans and a focus on the whole patient, eliminating independent work and divides that previously served to isolate healthcare delivery.

In what ways might you already participate in interprofessional collaboration in your nursing practice? What potential benefits might arise from fostering a community of practice in nursing?

Interprofessional Collaboration

Throughout my career, I’ve been a part of a number of interdisciplinary collaborations, some of which have been more successful than others. As a result of these encounters, I’ve identified several advantages and disadvantages of interprofessional collaboration (IPC). The importance of IPC among healthcare professionals is one of its strengths. In my profession, I’ve seen that most people are positive towards IPC. In my facility, many coworkers and other healthcare personnel agree that working together may improve patient care. “While the attitude toward IPC among healthcare professionals is strongly supportive,” according to Ansa et al. (2020), “many healthcare professionals confront hurdles in participating in IPC.” Lack of communication among coworkers, presuming a colleague from a different profession understands the “lingo” or other topics well, and resistance to change are some of the challenges I’ve experienced.

When treating patients with ST elevation myocardial infarctions in the emergency room, for example, we worked closely with the cardiac catheterization lab team (STEMIs). We had a policy at the institution where I worked of a 30-minute “door-to-balloon” time. This referred to the time between when the patient entered the hospital and when he or she was in the cath lab having intervention. Because of the time constraints, we had to act swiftly and efficiently with each STEMI patient to meet our goal. Of course, there are a number of obstacles to overcome. The cardiac catheterization team would come down to the ER to help prepare the patient. This resulted in some confusion, with employees attempting to execute many tasks at the same time. Instead than attempting to operate separately on the same patient with the same aim, it was critical for the ER and cardiac cath lab staff to collaborate.

“Effective collaboration fosters an environment for teamwork that supports safe and enhanced patient-centered care,” according to Ansa et al. (2020). (Ansa and colleagues, 2020). With time, the emergency room and cardiac cath lab staff were able to collaborate and develop a protocol for STEMI patients. We were able to meet our deadlines and have improved patient outcomes thanks to this approach, which enabled IPC among the team. Students from several fields were asked to develop case studies that included their distinct viewpoints, according to Henry et al. (2018). This was quite similar to my experience with the ER and cath lab employees. To provide the best patient care outcomes, the ER and cath lab staff have to pool their experiences, expertise, and understanding. “Learning more about problems that spanned various fields and occupations” “Working closely with others from disciplines other than their own allowed students to learn more about difficulties that spanned multiple fields and occupations” (Henry et al., 2018). The ER team learnt why timely intervention was critical and how to properly prepare a patient for a heart cath by working with the cath lab staff. The cardiac cath lab team learnt how to diagnose a STEMI in the ER and what the ER staff needed to perform. This knowledge transmission is what makes IPC such a good thing. “By combining their knowledge and experiences, they were able to discover potential treatment flaws or strengths” (Henry et al., 2018). The emergency room and cardiac cath lab staff collaborated to enhance the approach for STEMI patients. This was an excellent example of positive IPC in my opinion.

References

Ansa, B. E., Zechariah, S., Gates, A. M., Johnson, S. W., Heboyan, V., & De Leo, G. (2020). Attitudes and behavior towards interprofessional collaboration among healthcare professionals in a large academic medical center. Healthcare, 8(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8030323

Henry, B., Male, B., Garner, C., & Guernon, A., (2018). Teaching and learning about interprofessional collaboration through student-designed case study and analysis. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 30(3), 560-570.

What’s Happening This Module?

Module 3: Collaboration and the DNP Community of Practice is a 2-week module—Weeks 6–7 of the course—in which you examine intra- and interdisciplinary collaboration in nursing practice, including the strengths and challenges associated with these types of collaboration. In your Blog Assignments for this module, you will extend your understanding of these types of collaboration strategies while you also analyze your role as the DNP-prepared nurse in evaluating community and organizational needs, challenges, and issues. With these community and organizational considerations in mind, you will recommend practice changes and interventions to address those considerations, in essence, performing one of the core functions of the DNP-prepared nurse.

What do I have to do?

When do I have to do it?

Review your Learning Resources

Days 1–7, Weeks 6 and 7

Blog: How Do You Practice Intra- and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Practice?

Post by Day 3 of Week 6 and respond to your colleagues by Day 6 of Week 6.

Blog: The DNP-Prepared Nurse and Their Community

Post by Day 3 of Week 7 and respond to your colleagues by Day 6 of Week 7.

Go to the Week’s Content

Week 6

Week 7

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_8002_Week6_Blog_Rubric

· Grid View

· List View

Excellent

90%–100%

Good

80%–89%

Fair

70%–79%

Poor

0%–69%

Main Posting:

Response to the Blog prompt is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

18 (30%) – 20 (33.33%)

Thoroughly responds to the Blog prompt(s).

Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and/or current practice experiences.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

16 (26.67%) – 17 (28.33%)

Responds to most of the Blog prompt(s).

Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and/or current practice experiences.

50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

14 (23.33%) – 15 (25%)

Responds to some of the Blog prompt(s).

One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

0 (0%) – 13 (21.67%)

Does not respond to the Blog prompt(s).

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Main Posting:

Writing

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting:

Timely and full participation

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Blog post by due date.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

Meets requirements for full participation.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Posts main Blog post by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Blog post by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective.

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:
Writing

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response fully answers faculty questions, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response mostly answers faculty questions, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Response posed in the Blog may lack effective professional communication.

Response somewhat answers faculty questions, if posed.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Responses posted in the Blog lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions is missing.

First Response:
Timely and full participation

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective.

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response fully answers faculty questions, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response mostly answers faculty questions, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Response posed in the Blog may lack effective professional communication.

Response somewhat answers faculty questions, if posed.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Responses posted in the Blog lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions is missing.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.