Abstract
Summary
Interprofessional practice has been broadly endorsed as a strategy which supports the delivery of high-quality health services. Few studies have addressed the dynamics inherent to interprofessional mental health practice in an era in which client empowerment is prioritised and valued. Social work perspectives are also underexplored in the studies which have been published on interprofessional health care, despite the increasingly important role of this discipline in community mental health contexts. Through a thematic analysis of 26 semi-structured interviews, this study explored the perspectives of mental health social workers located in two geographically and culturally distinctive sites (Hong Kong and Sydney), and identified a strong theme encompassing their concerns about the facilitation of client empowerment in interprofessional settings.
Findings
Participant accounts direct attention to the strategies required to co-constitute the shared territories of the different mental health professions. Findings also highlight the frustration with recent mental health reforms which aim to challenge power differentials in interprofessional decision-making. Strategies were proposed for supporting the construction of shared language among different professions, revealing the creativity and insight of practitioners in managing the conflicts arising from interactions between different professional knowledge systems. The comparison of Hong Kong and Sydney accounts highlights the importance of structural, political and cultural influences in supporting not only interprofessional collaboration but also the independence and effectiveness of distinct professional roles.
Application
This article provides unique insights which aim to strengthen the contribution of social work to interprofessional practice in the promotion of empowerment-oriented interprofessional practice and education.
Interprofessional practice has been broadly endorsed as a strategy which supports the delivery of high-quality health services. Few studies have addressed the dynamics inherent to interprofessional mental health practice in an era in which client empowerment is prioritised and valued. Social work perspectives are also underexplored in the studies which have been published on interprofessional health care, despite the increasingly important role of this discipline in community mental health contexts. Through a thematic analysis of 26 semi-structured interviews, this study explored the perspectives of mental health social workers located in two geographically and culturally distinctive sites (Hong Kong and Sydney), and identified a strong theme encompassing their concerns about the facilitation of client empowerment in interprofessional settings.
Findings
Participant accounts direct attention to the strategies required to co-constitute the shared territories of the different mental health professions. Findings also highlight the frustration with recent mental health reforms which aim to challenge power differentials in interprofessional decision-making. Strategies were proposed for supporting the construction of shared language among different professions, revealing the creativity and insight of practitioners in managing the conflicts arising from interactions between different professional knowledge systems. The comparison of Hong Kong and Sydney accounts highlights the importance of structural, political and cultural influences in supporting not only interprofessional collaboration but also the independence and effectiveness of distinct professional roles.
Application
This article provides unique insights which aim to strengthen the contribution of social work to interprofessional practice in the promotion of empowerment-oriented interprofessional practice and education.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of Social Work |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 28 Apr 2021 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 31 Mar 2022 |
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was conducted within the Centre for Social Research in Health at UNSW Sydney, which receives funding from UNSW Arts, Design & Architecture and the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. This work was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship and Higher Degree Research Faculty Supported Research Funding from UNSW Arts, Design & Architecture.
