| Summary: | The purpose of this study was to test a hypothesized collaboration model composed of four components: team member, context, collaboration process, and degree of collaboration. A descriptive design using a causal modeling approach was used to test the collaboration model. The research settings were the healthcare centers and welfare centers in five provinces of Korea. The sample consisted of 40 nurse teams and 40 social worker teams. Data were collected from each team member and leaders involved in the Korean Home Visiting Services. Psychometric properties of all measures were assessed at both individual and team levels. Psychometric properties of all but one subscale (Agreement of Disciplinary Logic) exhibited reliability and evidence of validity as team measures. First hypothesis, team member and context variables have a direct effect on the collaboration process, was rejected. However, some team member variables directly impacted the collaboration process. Second hypothesis, team member, context, and collaboration process variables have a direct effect on the degree of collaboration, was rejected. However, some team member, context, and collaboration process variables directly impacted the degree of collaboration. Based on the research findings, the hypothesized collaboration model was revised.This study presented some implications for further research and collaboration practice. Future research needs to determine the reciprocal influence of each construct variable, explore the roles of each leadership style, and identify intervening or extraneous variables affecting collaboration. For the collaboration practice, this research can help healthcare providers develop realistic and effective strategies to enhance their collaboration, which would lead them to not only assess the elderly holistically, but to also effectively plan and provide comprehensive care services to solve complex health problems of the elderly. Thus, the elderly can maintain and improve their health and well-being. There were some study limitations related to the methodology and study findings. Sample size and a convenient sampling and a lack of random selection and diversity of the sample prevented generalization of study findings. A small number of context variables may have been insufficient to investigate the impact of context on collaboration, and potential model and variable misspecification and/or measurement errors may have occurred.
|
|---|
