Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Mar 27;35(2):132-141.
doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmx085.

Multidisciplinary collaboration in primary care: a systematic review

Affiliations

Multidisciplinary collaboration in primary care: a systematic review

Cecilia Saint-Pierre et al. Fam Pract. .

Abstract

Background: Several studies have discussed the benefits of multidisciplinary collaboration in primary care. However, what remains unclear is how collaboration is undertaken in a multidisciplinary manner in concrete terms.

Objective: To identify how multidisciplinary teams in primary care collaborate, in regards to the professionals involved in the teams and the collaborative activities that take place, and determine whether these characteristics and practices are present across disciplines and whether collaboration affects clinical outcomes.

Methods: A systematic literature review of past research, using the MEDLINE, ScienceDirect and Web of Science databases.

Results: Four types of team composition were identified: specialized teams, highly multidisciplinary teams, doctor-nurse-pharmacist triad and physician-nurse centred teams. Four types of collaboration within teams were identified: co-located collaboration, non-hierarchical collaboration, collaboration through shared consultations and collaboration via referral and counter-referral. Two combinations were commonly repeated: non-hierarchical collaboration in highly multidisciplinary teams and co-located collaboration in specialist teams. Fifty-two per cent of articles reported positive results when comparing collaboration against the non-collaborative alternative, whereas 16% showed no difference and 32% did not present a comparison.

Conclusion: Overall, collaboration was found to be positive or neutral in every study that compared collaboration with a non-collaborative alternative. A collaboration typology based on objective measures was devised, in contrast to typologies that involve interviews, perception-based questionnaires and other subjective instruments.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources