Skip to main content

Inside the Meeting: Discursive Approaches as a Framework for Understanding Multidisciplinary Team Meetings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 992 Accesses

Part of the book series: The Language of Mental Health ((TLMH))

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to set out the methodological framework which underpinned the research projects described in the other chapters of this book. The Authors describe some background to the development of multidisciplinary teamworking (MDTs) in the health and social care sector but draw particular attention to the disjuncture between the aspiration for teamworking and the actuality of its implementation. They argue for an ‘emic’ approach to understanding teamworking and thereby advocate a systematic discursive approach which focuses on the fine details of talk in interaction. The fundamental principles of conversation analysis and discursive psychology are described and illustrated with extracts from MDT meetings and healthcare encounters. The implications of this approach for understanding the ‘machinery’ of MDTs are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arber, A. (2008). Team meetings in specialist palliative care: Asking questions as a strategy within interprofessional interaction. Qualitative Health Research, 18(10), 1323–1335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732308322588.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, R. A., Cruice, M. N., & Playford, E. D. (2010). Strategies used in the pursuit of achievability during goal setting in rehabilitation. Qualitative Health Research, 20(2), 239–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732309358327.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bélanger, E., Rodriguez, C., Groleau, D., Légaré, F., Macdonald, M. E., & Marchand, R. (2014). Initiating decision-making conversations in palliative care: An ethnographic discourse analysis. BMC Palliative Care, 13: 63. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-684X/13/63.

  • Bokhour, B. G. (2006). Communication in interdisciplinary team meetings: What are we talking about? Journal of Interprofessional Care, 20(4), 349–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820600727205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B., Crawford, P., & Darongkamas, J. (2000). Blurred roles and permeable boundaries: The experience of multidisciplinary working in community mental health. Health and Social Care in the Community, 8(6), 425–435.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crown Copyright. (2012). Health and social care act. London: The Stationary Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Amour, D., Ferrada-Videla, M., San Martin Rodriguez, L., & Beaulieu, M.-D. (2005). The conceptual basis for interprofessional collaboration: Core concepts and theoretical frameworks. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(Sup1), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820500082529.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • D’Amour, D., Goulet, L., Labadie, J.-F., San Martín-Rodriguez, L., & Pineault, R. (2008). A model and typology of collaboration between professionals in healthcare organizations. BMC Health Services Research, 2008(8), 188. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deady, R. (2012). Studying multidisciplinary teams in the Irish Republic: The conceptual wrangle. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 48, 176–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6163.2011.00326.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P., Chatwin, J., & Collins, S. (2001). Conversation analysis: A method for research into interactions between patients and health-care professionals. Health Expectations, 4, 58–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D. (1997). Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive psychology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (2005). Discursive psychology, mental states and descriptions. In H. te Molder & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, K. M., Rosenthal, M. A., Dimou, J., Fleet, M., Gibbs, P., & Drummond, K. (2010). Communication in and clinician satisfaction with multidisciplinary team meetings in neuro-oncology. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 17, 1130–1135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, R., Learmonth, M., & Reedy, P. (2010). Some unintended effects of teamwork in healthcare. Social Science and Medicine, 70, 1148–1154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.12.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hayashi, M. (2013). Turn allocation and turn sharing. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hepburn, H., & Bolden, G. (2013). The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2010). Questioning in medicine. In A. F. Freed & S. Ehrlich (Eds.), “Why do you ask?”: The function of questions in institutional discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J., Robinson, J. D., Elliot, M., Beckett, M., & Wilkes, M. (2007). Reducing patients’ unmet concerns: The difference one word can make. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22, 1429–1433.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kitzinger, C. (2013). Repair. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuziemsky, C. E., Borycki, E. M., Purkis, M. E., Black, F., Boyle, M., …, Interprofessional Practices Team. (2009). An interdisciplinary team communication framework and its application to healthcare ‘e-teams’ systems design. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 9, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-9-43.

  • Lewin, S., & Reeves, S. (2011). Enacting ‘team’ and ‘teamwork’: Using Goffman’s theory of impression management to illuminate interprofessional practice on hospital wards. Social Science and Medicine, 72, 1595–1602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.037.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Carroll, V., McSwiggan, L., & Campbell, M. (2016). Health and social care professionals’ attitudes to interprofessional working and interprofessional education: A literature review. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 30(1), 42–49. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2015.1051614.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pillay, B., Wootten, A. C., Crowe, H., Corcoran, N., Tran, B., Bowden, P., ... & Costello, A. J. (2016). The impact of multidisciplinary team meetings on patient assessment, management and outcomes in oncology settings: A systematic review of the literature. Cancer Treatment Reviews, 42, 56–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz, A., & Heritage, J. (2013). Preference. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 281–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2012). Eight challenges for interview researchers. In J. F. Gubrium, J. A. Holstein, A. B. Marvasti, & K. D. McKinney (Eds.), The Sage handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., & te Molder, H. (2005). Talking cognition: Making and mapping the terrain. In H. te Molder & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, S., Lewin, S., Espin, S., & Zwarenstein, M. (2010). Interprofessional teamwork for health and social care. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, S., Xyrichis, A., & Zwarenstein, M. (2018). Teamwork, collaboration, coordination, and networking: Why we need to distinguish between different types of interprofessional practice. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 32(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1400150.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, K., Zwarenstein, M., Conn, L. G., Kenaszchuk, C., Russell, A., & Reeves, S. (2010). An intervention to improve interprofessional collaboration and communications: A comparative qualitative study. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 24, 350–361. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820903550713.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roulston, K. (2011). Working through challenges in doing interview research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10(4), 348–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation (2 vols.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation analysis: An introduction. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokoe, E. (2011). Simulated interaction and communication skills training: The ‘Conversation-Analytic Role-Play Method’. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Applied conversation analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry. (2013). Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry: Executive summary (Chaired by Robert Francis QC). London: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toefien, M., Irvine, A., Drew, P., & Sainsbury, R. (2011). Should mandatory jobseeker interviews be personalised? The politics of using conversation analysis to make effective practice recommendations. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Applied conversation analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, C., & Drew, V. (2017). Humour and laughter in meetings: Influence, decision-making and the emergence of leadership. Discourse and Communication, 11(3), 314–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481317699432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, S. (2017). Discursive psychology: Theory, method and applications. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wittenberg-Lyles, E., Oliver, D. P., Demiris, G., & Regehr, K. (2010). Interdisciplinary collaboration in hospice team meetings. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 24(3), 264–273. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820903163421.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zwarenstein, M., Goldman J., & Reeves, S. (2009). Interprofessional collaboration: Effects of practice-based interventions on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (3). Art. No.: CD000072. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd000072.pub2.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy Auburn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Auburn, T., Smart, C., Tremblett, M. (2018). Inside the Meeting: Discursive Approaches as a Framework for Understanding Multidisciplinary Team Meetings. In: Smart, C., Auburn, T. (eds) Interprofessional Care and Mental Health. The Language of Mental Health. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98228-1_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics