Collaborative care documentation.

Both urologists and gynecologists are involved in the care of women with urinary incontinence (UI) and pelvic floor prolapse (PFP). This study was designed to examine the differences among urologists and gynecologists who treat UI and PFP, and to characterize the collaboration between them. A 14-question survey was mailed to the International Continence Society (ICS) members who are urologists or gynecologists. Questions dealt with professional training, type of practice, volume of UI and PFP procedures, preferred procedures for various types of UI and PFP, and the type and extent of collaboration. Of the 666 urologists and gynecologists to whom the questionnaire was sent, 229 responded (34.4% response rate). Among them, 63.7% were urologists and 36.2% were gynecologists. Collaboration in the operating room was reported by 140 responders (50.7%) and was significantly correlated with the specialty, and with the country of practice, with P values of 0.004, and 0.004, respectively. Collaboration in the operating room was reported mainly in procedures for the correction of vaginal vault prolapse or enterocele, and hysterectomy. It was not statistically correlated with the time dedicated to UI and PFP, the volume of surgeries performed, UI and PFP fellowship training, university hospital affiliation, and years in practice. Reasons for not collaborating in the operating room included familiarity with all or most of the anti-incontinence and pelvic floor reconstruction procedures (44.5%), unavailability of the other professional (6.1%), and reimbursement problems (3.1%). While urologists and gynecologists do collaborate extensively in clinical research and diagnosis of challenging cases, surgical collaboration is limited to procedures traditionally performed by gynecologists. Future training programs exposing trainees to both fields of expertise may enable better ground for collaboration and improved care for women with UI and PFP.

Cooperative Behavior↗

PubMed2001

SSM Health Care clinical collaboratives: improving the value of patient care in a health care system.

BACKGROUND: In 1998 SSM Health Care (St Louis) began a series of clinical collaboratives modeled after The Institute of Healthcare Improvement (Boston) Breakthrough Series. There are now four collaboratives, with 46 teams in progress, and four additional collaboratives are scheduled. COLLABORATIVE TOPICS AND STRUCTURE: Each collaborative consists of three phases: the prework, active, and the continuous improvement phases. The structure of the collaboratives is quite similar to that of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Breakthrough Series. However, the SSMHC collaboratives include a continuous improvement phase, which was designed to help maintain gains from the projects and to involve entities not originally involved in the collaborative. RESULTS OF COLLABORATIVES IN PROGRESS: Entity teams participating in multiple collaboratives seem to ascend a learning curve and become progressively more skilled in subsequent collaborative work. In Collaborative 1--Improving the Secondary Prevention of Ischemic Heart Disease--the participating entities showed significant improvement in cholesterol screening and treatment. In Collaborative 2--Improving Prescribing Practices--the collaborative teams also showed significant improvement, with a combined cost savings of approximately $450,000 per year. Collaboratives 3--Using Patient Information to Improve Care and Assure Success-and-4--Enhancing Patient Safety Through Safe Systems--are under way. SUMMARY: The collaboratives accelerate improvement work through sharing of successes and failures and peer influence within a reinforcing environment. Most of the collaborative teams have reached their project goals, and the pace of clinical improvement work has accelerated since the start of the collaboratives. The collaboratives provide an environment for clinicians to constructively participate in improvement of patient care.

Cooperative Behavior↗