The concept of team climate is widely used to understand and evaluate working environments. It shares some important features with Interprofessional Collaboration (IPC). The four-factor theory of climate for work group innovation, which underpins team climate, could provide a better basis for understanding both teamwork and IPC. This article examines in detail the common ground between team climate and IPC, and assesses the relevance of team climate as a theoretical approach to understanding IPC. There are important potential areas of overlap between team climate and IPC that we have grouped under four headings: (1) interaction and communication between team members; (2) common objectives around which collective work is organised; (3) responsibility for performing work to a high standard; and (4) promoting innovation in working practices. These overlapping areas suggest common characteristics that could provide elements of a framework for considering the contribution of team climate to collaborative working, both from a conceptual perspective and, potentially, in operational terms as, for example, a diagnostic tool.

Relational and organisational factors are key elements of interprofessional collaboration (IPC) and team climate. Few studies have explored the relationship between IPC and team climate. This article presents a study that aimed to explore IPC in primary healthcare teams and understand how the assessment of team climate may provide insights into IPC. A mixed methods study design was adopted. In Stage 1 of the study, team climate was assessed using the Team Climate Inventory with 159 professionals in 18 interprofessional teams based in São Paulo, Brazil. In Stage 2, data were collected through in-depth interviews with a sample of team members who participated in the first stage of the study. Results from Stage 1 provided an overview of factors relevant to teamwork, which in turn informed our exploration of the relationship between team climate and IPC. Preliminary findings from Stage 2 indicated that teams with a more positive team climate (in particular, greater participative safety) also reported more effective communication and mutual support. In conclusion, team climate provided insights into IPC, especially regarding aspects of communication and interaction in teams. Further research will provide a better understanding of differences and areas of overlap between team climate and IPC. It will potentially contribute for an innovative theoretical approach to explore interprofessional work in primary care settings.

IntroductionThe health organizations of today are highly complex and specialized. Given this scenario, there is a need for health professionals to work collaboratively within interprofessional work teams to ensure quality and safe care. To strengthen interprofessional teamwork, it is imperative that health organizations enhance strategic human resources management by promoting team member satisfaction.ObjectiveTo analyze the satisfaction of members in interprofessional teams and to explore interpersonal relationships, leadership, and team climate in a hospital context.MethodologyThis study is an explanatory sequential mixed methods (quantitative/qualitative) study of 53 teams (409 professionals) at a university hospital in Santiago, Chile. The first phase involved quantitative surveys with team members examining team satisfaction, transformational leadership, and team climate. Social network analysis was used to identify interactions among team members (cohesion and centrality). The second phase involved interviews with 15 professionals belonging to teams with the highest and lowest team satisfaction scores. Findings of both phases were integrated.ResultsSignificant associations were found among variables, and the linear regression model showed that team climate (β = 0.26) was a better predictor of team satisfaction than team leadership (β = 0.17). Registered nurse was perceived as the profession with the highest score on the transformational leadership measure (mean = 64), followed by the physician (mean = 33). Team networks with the highest and lowest score of team satisfaction showed differences in cohesion and centrality measures. Analysis of interviews identified five themes: attributes of interprofessional work; collaboration, communication, and social interaction; interprofessional team innovation; shared leadership; and interpersonal relationship interface work/social. Integration of findings revealed that team member satisfaction requires participation and communication, common goals and commitment for patient-centered care, clear roles and objectives to support collaborative work, and the presence of a transformational leader to strengthen well-being, dialog, and innovation.ConclusionsResults have the potential to contribute to the planning and decision-making in the field of human resources, providing elements to promote the management of health teams and support team member satisfaction. In turn, this could lead to job permanence especially where the local health needs are more urgent.

Background Brazilian primary health care is organized by decentralized Family Health Strategy composed with interprofessional teams. This study focused on finding out how are the relationship between the management model of primary health services and interprofessional practice. Methods Qualitative study, part of a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with health managers from six Brazilian municipalities. Data were collected between October and December 2018 and applied content analysis. Results The results allow three major content categories, 1) “Characteristics of management models to support interprofessional practice”: continuous communication among managers, health care professional and patients is the principal attribute of management. The interviewed mentioned the need to communicate with teams using regular meetings and technological resources. They recognize the availability of interprofessional practice in favour of dialogue, shared decision and physical space. In order to patient engagement, they adopted open communication with patients focused on spontaneous demands. 2)”Management actions for comprehensive care”: the interviewed recognized the lack of services integration and interprofessional teams. They mentioned participatory management strategies as team meetings in health services and engagement in public health council to shared health planning. 3)”Challenges for management interprofessional practice”: Challenges considered the lack of permanent policies focused on patient needs, frequent changes of the municipal managers and health care professionals, the lack of planning actions, and the need to meet spontaneous management demands. Conclusions Management practices can support interprofessional practice and comprehensive care however challenges are related to non-permanent policies, unplanning actions and spontaneous management demands. Key messages Communication is the principal attribute of the management model of primary health services to reinforce interprofessional practice. Compreehensive care depends on patient and interprofessional teamwork engagement for share decision making.

Background Interprofessional teams are responsible for Primary Care at Brazilian HealthCare System. Teamwork climate is considered a key for quality of healthcare services and care perceived; it results in perceptions about a team, considering aspects that influence their relationship and effectiveness. The study aims to analyse the teamwork climate of Primary Care workers. Methods Survey cross-sectional carried out in a region of São Paulo countryside with 419 Primary Care professionals from 60 teams of public health services. We collect data through the Team Climate Inventory with 38 items and 4 factors. We analysed the data using a psychometric, factorial confirmatory analysis. This research is part of the Universal CNPq Project, process 431461/20163, and all ethical concerns were observed. Results In the sample 47 (11.2%) were nurses, 143 (34.1%) community health workers, 87 (20.7%) nursing assistants and 27 (6.4%) physicians and 115 (27,6%) other health professionals. Cronbach was >0,90 in all factors of Team Climate Inventory and the correlation was confirmed with p < 0,05. In the factor 1 - Team Participation M = 3,79, DP = 0,66; factor 2 - Support to new ideas M = 3,66, DP = 0,68; factor 3 - Team objectives M = 5,04, DP = 0,98; factor 4 - Tasks orientation M = 4,92, DP = 1,30 with p-value 0,001 to all factors. Tukey's post hoc analysis indicated that the group with less than one year in the teams (M = 5.31) had a significantly higher average when compared to groups with 6 to 10 years in the team (M = 4.91) and 11 years old or more (M = 5.04). Conclusions Results showed a good team climate in the sample, the potential to strengthen the teams and the relevance of working time together to get better results for patient health care. The magnitude of the public health impact by reporting on the team climate indicators of the 60 Brazilian teams are local and international relevance. Key messages The time of work together in a team can be a predictor of clear objectives in teamwork. The team climate recognizing can promote reinforce of the teamwork and the results to Public Health. Policy makers and managers can apply these results to build workforce management actions.