Fysioterapeuten 6-2021

FYSIOTERAPEUTEN 6/21 21 ringsstrategien fordi en unngår utspill som går i mange ulike retninger [13, 16]. Metoderefleksjon Studien er en single case studie. Funnene fra studien kan generaliseres i analytisk, men ikke statisk forstand. Ana- lytisk generalisering innebærer at funnene sannsynligvis kan overføres til kontekster som ligner på den studerte [17, 21]. I vårt tilfelle betyr det at funnene fra denne studien trolig gjør seg gjeldende i rehabiliteringsavdelinger som i stor grad ligner på den vi har studert. Singel case studie- designet egner seg til å få frem dybdekunnskap knyttet til nøkkelcase [18], som i dette tilfellet er en kommunal døgn- rehabiliteringsavdeling. Med andre ord illustrerer case-stu- dien en fungerende rehabiliteringspraksis som kan inspi- rere andre enheter som ønsker å jobbe på tilsvarende måte. Konklusjon Relasjonell ekspertise, felles kunnskap og relasjonell hand- lekraft er sentrale premisser i utviklingen av et velfunge- rende tverrprofesjonelt samarbeid i en kommunal døgnre- habiliteringsavdeling. At kunnskapen er felles innebærer at kunnskapen går utover grensene til den enkelte profesjon og samarbeidet tilføres noe mer enn summen av det den enkelte profesjon bidrar med. I dette tverrprofesjonelle samarbeidet inngår også pasient og pårørende som viktige aktører. Referanser 1. Hagen, R. and E. Johnsen, Styring gjennom samhandling, in Samhandling for helse, L. Melby and A.H. Tjora, Editors. 2013, Gyldendal akademisk: Oslo. 2. Sentralbyrå, S., Helseforhold, Levekårsundersøkelsen om helse 2019. 25.juni 2020. 3. Omsorgsdepartementet, H.-o., Samhandlingsreformen, in Rett behandling - på rett sted - til rett tid, H.-o. omsorgsdepartementet, Editor. 2009, Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet: Oslo. p. 150. 4. Omsorgsdepartementet, H.-o., Opptrappingsplan for habilitering og reha- bilitering (2017 - 2019), H.o. omsorg, Editor. 2016, Helse- og omsorgsdepar- tementet. p. 56. 5. Willumsen, E., Tverrprofesjonelt samarbeid i utdanning og praksis i helse- og velferdssektoren, in Tverrprofesjonelt samarbeid : et samfunnsoppdrag E. Willumsen and A. Ødegård, Editors. 2016, Universitetsforl.: Oslo. p. 33-78. 6. McPherson, K., B.E. Gibson, and A. Leplege, Rethinking Rehabilitation: Theory and Practice. 1 ed. Rehabilitation Science in Practice, ed. M.J. Scherer and D. Muller. Vol. 10. 2015, Boca Raton: CRC Press. 7. Rehabiliteringsforskriften, Forskrift om habilitering og rehabilitering, indi- viduell plan og koordinator, S.-o. helsedepartementet, Editor. 2018, Sosial- og helsedepartementet: Oslo. 8 . Helsedirektoratet, Nasjonal veileder for rehabilitering, habilitering, individu- ell plan og koordinator. 2018, Helsedirektoratet: Oslo. 9. Helsedirektoratet, Evaluering av Opptrappingsplan for habilitering og rehabilitering (2017-2019), Helsedirektoratet, Editor. 2020, KPMG. p. 108. 10. Kvæl, L.A.H., et al., A Concept Analysis of Patient Participation in Intermediate Care. Patient Education and Counseling, 2018. 101(8): p. 1337- 1350. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2018.03.005 11. Kvæl, L.A.H., et al., Health-care professionals’ experiences of patient participation among older patients in intermediate care-At the intersection between profession, market and bureaucracy. Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2019. https://www.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12896 12. Johannessen, A.K., A. Werner, and S. Steihaug, Work in an intermediate unit: balancing between relational, practical and moral care. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 2014. 23(3-4): p. 586-595. https://www.doi.org/10.1111/ hex.12896 13. Edwards, A., The role of common knowledge in achieving collaboration across practices. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2012. 1(1): p. 22- 32. https://www.doi.org/1 0.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.003 14. EdgeHillUniversityResearchInstitute, I4P Lectures Series - Prof Anne Edwards - YouTube. 2014, YouTube: https://www.edgehill.ac.uk/isr/public- lecture-8th-october-2014/. 15. Edwards, A., Being an expert professional practitioner: The relational turn in expertise, in Professional and practice-based learning. 2010, Dordrecht: Springer: Dordrecht. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3969-9 16. Edwards, A., Revealing Relational Work, in Working relationally in and across practices: a cultural-historical approach to collaboration, A. Edwards, Editor. 2017, Cambridge University Press. p. 1-22. 17. Flyvbjerg, B., Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. SAGE Qualitative Research Methods, 2010. 12(2): p. 219-245. https://www.doi. org/10.1177/1077800405284363 18. Thomas, G., A Typology for the Case Study in Social Science Following a Review of Definition, Discourse, and Structure. Qualitative Inquiry, 2011. 17(6): p. 511-521. https://www.doi.org/10.1177/107780041140988 19. Malterud, K., Fokusgrupper som forskningsmetode for medisin og helse- fag. 2012, Oslo: Universitetsforl. 20. Braun, V. and V. Clarke, Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qua- litative Research in Psychology, 2006. 3(2): p. 77-101. https://www.doi. org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 21. Brinkmann, S., and S. Kvale. Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. 2015. (Vol. 3). Sage Publications Inc: Thousand Oaks, CA. Title: Interprofessional collaboration in a municipal 24-hour rehabilitation unit. A qualitative study of the professionals’ experiences Abstract Purpose : To investigate how interprofessional collabo- ration is developed in a municipal 24-hour rehabilitation unit. Design, material and method : Single case study. The empirical material is conducted using focus group interview. The focus group included a physiotherapist, occupational therapist, auxiliary nurse, doctor and nurse. The analysis is thematic, and Edward’s theory of interdisciplinary collaboration constitutes the theoreti- cal framework for the analyses. Findings : The findings are presented as four topics: 1) Rehabilitation potential, clarification of expecta- tions and common goal, 2) Practical collaboration and common knowledge, 3) Next of kin as contributors and partners, demanding decisions and grief work and 4) Professional glasses, rehabilitation glasses and com- mon interdisciplinary knowledge. The findings show how relational expertise, common knowledge and relational agency are established as a common inter- professional platform where the sum is larger than the contribution from each of the professionals. The study also shows that patient and next of kin involvement is an important part of the interdisciplinary collaboration. Conclusion : Common knowledge that all professionals share is a central premise in the interdisciplinary col- laboration, the knowledge constitutes something more than what the individual profession represents, and the patient and next of kin are involved in the collabora- tion. Interprofessional collaboration requires that the individual professional is able to contribute to such a common knowledge production. Keywords : Inter-professional collaboration, relational expertise, common knowledge, relational agency, muni- cipal 24-hour rehabilitation unit.