Cecilia Flores-Sandoval1, Shannon Sibbald2, Bridget L Ryan3, Joseph B Orange1,4,5. 1. Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Program, Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 2. Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Health Studies, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, The Schulich Interfaculty Program in Public Health, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 3. Centre for Studies in Family Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 4. School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 5. Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Discussions concerning health care teams and patient-related terminology remain an ongoing debate. Terms such as interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary, as well as interprofessional are ambiguously defined and frequently used, rightly or wrongly, interchangeably. Also, clarification on the terminology regarding patients is rarely explicitly addressed in the health care team's literature, potentially resulting in confusion among health professional students, novice researchers, and practitioners. METHODS: A structured literature review was conducted. Electronic searches were performed from August 2018 to September 2019 on the following databases: CINHAL, Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Nursing and Allied Health and JSTOR. The following terms were used: 'terminology', 'team(s)', 'nursing', 'health', 'medical', 'education', 'interprofessional', 'interdisciplinary', 'multidisciplinary', 'transdisciplinary', 'collaboration', 'patient', 'client', 'customer', 'user' and 'person'. RESULTS: Small but significant nuances in the use of language and its implications for patient care can be made visible for health professional education and clinical practice. Healthcare is necessarily interdisciplinary and therefore we are obligated, and privileged, to think more critically about the use of terminology to ensure we are supporting high-quality evidence and knowledge application. CONCLUSION: To avoid confusion and lack of consistency in the peer-review literature, authors should be encouraged to offer brief definitions and the rationale for the use of a particular term or group of term. In addition, a deeper understanding of the values that each patient-related term represents for particular disciplines or health care professions is essential to achieve a more comprehensive conceptual rigour.
BACKGROUND: Discussions concerning health care teams and patient-related terminology remain an ongoing debate. Terms such as interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary, as well as interprofessional are ambiguously defined and frequently used, rightly or wrongly, interchangeably. Also, clarification on the terminology regarding patients is rarely explicitly addressed in the health care team's literature, potentially resulting in confusion among health professional students, novice researchers, and practitioners. METHODS: A structured literature review was conducted. Electronic searches were performed from August 2018 to September 2019 on the following databases: CINHAL, Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Nursing and Allied Health and JSTOR. The following terms were used: 'terminology', 'team(s)', 'nursing', 'health', 'medical', 'education', 'interprofessional', 'interdisciplinary', 'multidisciplinary', 'transdisciplinary', 'collaboration', 'patient', 'client', 'customer', 'user' and 'person'. RESULTS: Small but significant nuances in the use of language and its implications for patient care can be made visible for health professional education and clinical practice. Healthcare is necessarily interdisciplinary and therefore we are obligated, and privileged, to think more critically about the use of terminology to ensure we are supporting high-quality evidence and knowledge application. CONCLUSION: To avoid confusion and lack of consistency in the peer-review literature, authors should be encouraged to offer brief definitions and the rationale for the use of a particular term or group of term. In addition, a deeper understanding of the values that each patient-related term represents for particular disciplines or health care professions is essential to achieve a more comprehensive conceptual rigour.
Authors: Amy Trentham-Dietz; Jennifer E Bird; Ronald E Gangnon; Sara M Lindberg; Tena Madison; Kristen M C Malecki; James D Shull; Claudia Vredeveld; Betsy Rolland Journal: Curr Epidemiol Rep Date: 2022-02-21
Authors: Stefan Schilling; Maria Armaou; Zoe Morrison; Paul Carding; Martin Bricknell; Vincent Connelly Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-08-18 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Edward J Alessi; Barbara Caldwell; Anthony S Zazzarino; Brett Greenfield; Patricia A Findley Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-01-18 Impact factor: 2.655