Exploring implicit influences on interprofessional collaboration: a scoping review. Issue 5 (3rd September 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sukhera, Javeed; Bertram, Kaitlyn; Hendrikx, Shawn; Chisolm, Margaret S.; Perzhinsky, Juliette; Kennedy, Erin; Lingard, Lorelei; Goldszmidt, Mark
• Is Part Of: Journal of interprofessional care. Volume 36:Issue 5(2022)
• Page Start: 716
• Page End: 724
• Publication Date: 2022-09-03
• Subjects: Bias -- collaboration -- equity -- power; Holistic medicine -- Periodicals; Interprofessional relations -- Periodicals; Health care teams -- Periodicals; 361
• DOI: 10.1080/13561820.2021.1979946
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1356-1820

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is fraught with multiple tensions. This is partly due to implicit biases within teams, which can reflect larger social, physical, organizational, and historical contexts. Such biases may influence communication, trust, and how collaboration is enacted within larger contexts. Despite the impact it has on teams, the influence of bias on IPC is relatively under-explored. Therefore, the authors conducted a scoping review on the influence of implicit biases within interprofessional teams. Using scoping review methodology, the authors searched several online databases. From 2792 articles, two reviewers independently conducted title/abstract screening, selecting 159 articles for full-text eligibility. From these, reviewers extracted, coded, and iteratively analyzed key data using a framework derived from socio-material theories. Authors found that many studies demonstrated how biases regarding dominance and expertise were internalized by team members, influencing collaboration in predominantly negative ways. Articles also described how team members dynamically adapted to such biases. Overall, there was a paucity of research that described material influences, often focusing on a single material element instead of the dynamic ways that humans and materials are known to interact and influence each other. In conclusion, implicit biases are relatively under-explored within IPC. The lack of research on material influences and the relationship among racial, age-related, and gender biases are critical gaps in the literature. Future research should consider the longitudinal and reciprocal nature of both positive and negative influences of bias on collaboration in diverse settings.