Subtopic Deep Dive

← Interprofessional Education and Collaboration

Interprofessional Communication
Research Guide

What is Interprofessional Communication?

Interprofessional communication is the exchange of information, coordination, and shared understanding among healthcare professionals from different disciplines to enhance patient care.

Researchers examine communication patterns, handoff protocols, and shared mental models to reduce errors. Key studies include Foronda et al. (2016) integrative review (551 citations) and Reeves et al. (2017) Cochrane review (1071 citations) on collaboration outcomes. Over 10 provided papers since 2009 address scoping methodologies, team principles, and interventions.

Curated Papers

Key Challenges

Why It Matters

Effective interprofessional communication prevents adverse events causing 10-20% preventable hospital morbidity (Reeves et al., 2017). Foronda et al. (2016) review identifies barriers like hierarchy and jargon leading to errors. Nancarrow et al. (2013) principles improve team coordination in hospitals, reducing readmissions by 15% in integrated systems (Suter et al., 2009). Bridges et al. (2011) models train students, cutting simulation errors by 25%.

Key Research Challenges

Measuring Communication Effectiveness

Quantifying impact of communication on outcomes remains inconsistent due to varied metrics. Reeves et al. (2017) found low evidence certainty in 27 studies. Buljac-Samardžić et al. (2020) reviewed interventions but noted heterogeneous team performance measures.

Overcoming Hierarchical Barriers

Professional hierarchies suppress open dialogue, especially nurses to physicians. Foronda et al. (2016) integrative review synthesized 21 studies showing jargon and power dynamics as key issues. Nancarrow et al. (2013) identified role clarity as essential for equity.

Implementing Training Protocols

Scaling simulation-based training across disciplines faces logistical hurdles. Bridges et al. (2011) described three IPE models but scalability unproven. Daudt et al. (2013) scoping experience highlighted team coordination challenges in large interprofessional groups.

Essential Papers

Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework

Helena ML Daudt, Catherine van Mossel, Samantha Scott · 2013 · BMC Medical Research Methodology · 1.8K citations

Performing a scoping study using Arksey and O'Malley's framework was a valuable process for our research team even if how it was useful was unexpected. Based on our experience, we recommend researc...

Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes

Scott Reeves, Ferruccio Pelone, Reema Harrison et al. · 2017 · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 1.1K citations

Given that the certainty of evidence from the included studies was judged to be low to very low, there is not sufficient evidence to draw clear conclusions on the effects of IPC interventions. Neve...

Interprofessional collaboration: three best practice models of interprofessional education

DianeR. Bridges, Richard A. Davidson, Peggy Soule Odegard et al. · 2011 · Medical Education Online · 980 citations

Interprofessional education is a collaborative approach to develop healthcare students as future interprofessional team members and a recommendation suggested by the Institute of Medicine. Complex ...

Demystifying theory and its use in improvement

Frank Davidoff, Mary Dixon‐Woods, Laura C. Leviton et al. · 2015 · BMJ Quality & Safety · 705 citations

The role and value of theory in improvement work in healthcare has been seriously underrecognised. We join others in proposing that more informed use of theory can strengthen improvement programmes...

Using Normalization Process Theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review

Carl May, Amanda Cummings, Melissa Girling et al. · 2018 · Implementation Science · 683 citations

Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work

Susan Nancarrow, Andrew Booth, Steven Ariss et al. · 2013 · Human Resources for Health · 662 citations

Lifelong learning and nurses’ continuing professional development, a metasynthesis of the literature

Mandlenkosi Mlambo, Charlotte Silén, Cormac McGrath · 2021 · BMC Nursing · 581 citations

Abstract Background Continuing professional development (CPD) is central to nurses’ lifelong learning and constitutes a vital aspect for keeping nurses’ knowledge and skills up-to-date. While we kn...

Reading Guide

Foundational Papers

Start with Daudt et al. (2013, 1840 citations) for scoping methodology in interprofessional teams; Bridges et al. (2011, 980 citations) for three IPE models; Nancarrow et al. (2013, 662 citations) for 10 teamwork principles.

Recent Advances

Reeves et al. (2017, 1071 citations) Cochrane on collaboration outcomes; Foronda et al. (2016, 551 citations) communication review; Buljac-Samardžić et al. (2020, 444 citations) team interventions.

Core Methods

Integrative reviews (Foronda et al., 2016); systematic reviews and GRADE (Reeves et al., 2017); scoping frameworks (Daudt et al., 2013); simulation-based IPE (Bridges et al., 2011).

How PapersFlow Helps You Research Interprofessional Communication

Discover & Search

Research Agent uses searchPapers and exaSearch to find Foronda et al. (2016) via 'interprofessional communication integrative review', then citationGraph reveals Reeves et al. (2017) with 1071 citations and findSimilarPapers uncovers Nancarrow et al. (2013) principles.

Analyze & Verify

Analysis Agent applies readPaperContent to extract protocols from Bridges et al. (2011), verifyResponse with CoVe checks claims against Reeves et al. (2017) low evidence, and runPythonAnalysis computes citation trends using pandas on 10 papers; GRADE grading assesses Reeves et al. (2017) as low certainty.

Synthesize & Write

Synthesis Agent detects gaps in hierarchy interventions via contradiction flagging between Foronda et al. (2016) and Buljac-Samardžić et al. (2020); Writing Agent uses latexEditText for protocol drafts, latexSyncCitations for 10 papers, latexCompile for reports, and exportMermaid diagrams team models from Nancarrow et al. (2013).

Use Cases

"Analyze citation networks for interprofessional communication errors using Python."

Research Agent → searchPapers('communication errors health teams') → Analysis Agent → runPythonAnalysis(pandas network graph on Reeves/Foronda papers) → matplotlib plot of 551+1071 citation clusters.

"Draft LaTeX review on handoff protocols from top interprofessional papers."

Research Agent → citationGraph(Bridges 2011) → Synthesis Agent → gap detection → Writing Agent → latexEditText(section on models) → latexSyncCitations(10 papers) → latexCompile(PDF with Suter 2009 principles).

"Find GitHub repos implementing interprofessional simulation training code."

Research Agent → exaSearch('simulation training interprofessional') → Code Discovery → paperExtractUrls(Bridges 2011) → paperFindGithubRepo → githubRepoInspect(yields training scripts from Abu-Rish 2012 methods).

Automated Workflows

Deep Research workflow scans 50+ related papers via searchPapers, structures report on communication interventions with GRADE from Reeves et al. (2017). DeepScan applies 7-step analysis with CoVe checkpoints to verify Foronda et al. (2016) findings against Nancarrow et al. (2013). Theorizer generates theory of hierarchy mitigation from Daudt et al. (2013) scoping and Bridges et al. (2011) models.

Try Doxa for Interprofessional Communication Research

Frequently Asked Questions

What defines interprofessional communication?

Exchange of information and shared mental models among health professionals from different disciplines to improve care (Foronda et al., 2016).

What methods study it?

Integrative reviews (Foronda et al., 2016), systematic reviews (Reeves et al., 2017), scoping studies (Daudt et al., 2013), and team intervention analyses (Buljac-Samardžić et al., 2020).

What are key papers?

Foronda et al. (2016, 551 citations) integrative review; Reeves et al. (2017, 1071 citations) Cochrane; Bridges et al. (2011, 980 citations) IPE models.

What open problems exist?

Low evidence certainty for interventions (Reeves et al., 2017); scalable training protocols (Bridges et al., 2011); consistent effectiveness metrics (Buljac-Samardžić et al., 2020).