3.8 Article

Skill-sharing between allied health professionals in a community setting: A randomised controlled trial

Journal

Publisher

MA HEALTHCARE LTD
DOI: 10.12968/ijtr.2015.22.11.524

Keywords

Professional skill-sharing; Transprofessional care; Transdisciplinary care; Allied health; The Calderdale Framework; Randomised controlled trial

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/Aims: The increasing demand for health services necessitates workforce redesign to reduce inefficiencies while maintaining quality of care. Health services have been implementing professional skill-sharing models of care to enable allied health practitioners to expand their scope of practice. This article reports the outcome of a randomised controlled trial that investigated the clinical effectiveness of professional skill-sharing. Methods: The Calderdale Framework was used to establish a model of professional skill-sharing. A randomised controlled trial was carried out with community-dwelling older people aged 65 years and above experiencing functional decline (n=153). Participants were randomised to professional skill-sharing intervention (n=77) or uni-professional occupational therapy and/or physiotherapy care control (n=76). Disability, mobility, independence in activities of daily living and quality of life were measured by a blinded assessor at baseline, 1 and 4 months post-randomisation. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in any of the outcome measures between groups. Less than half (43%) of the controls received uni-professional intervention. Sub-group analysis of intervention and control participants who had received uni-professional intervention upheld the results of the main analysis. Conclusions: Professional skill-sharing was equivalent in outcome to conventional, uni-professional occupational therapy and/or physiotherapy for a community-dwelling ageing population experiencing functional decline. Further research is required.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available