Healthcare professionals’ perceptions regarding interprofessional collaborative practice in Indonesia

Background: Effective interprofessional collaborative practice can strengthen and optimise healthcare. Objective assessment of collaborative practice using a valid instrument is important in a healthcare setting for assessing the effectiveness of a team's interprofessional collaborative practice. One of the instruments that can be used for this purpose is the Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool (CPAT). This study aims to evaluate the interprofessional collaborative practice of healthcare practitioners in Indonesia using CPAT. Method: This was a cross sectional study conducted from March to June 2017. The CPAT questionnaire was validated and the subscales were identified through factor analysis. The Cronbach alpha of the Indonesian version of the CPAT questionnaire, with a total of 53 questions, was very good (0.916). Result: The study involved 304 respondents drawn from the medical and healthcare personnel at Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital. This study used the Indonesian version of CPAT that has been validated in the Indonesian context. The Indonesian version of CPAT consists of eight components: 1) relationships among team members, 2) barriers to team collaboration, 3) team relationships within the community, 4) team coordination and organisation, 5) decision making and conflict management, 6) leadership, 7) missions, goals and objectives and 8) patient involvement, responsibility and autonomy. There were no significant differences in the total score for perceived collaborative practice according to age, gender, professional background or length of work experience in the profession. However, there was a significant difference in the team barrier component based on the profession, age and length of work experience in the profession. The significant difference in the team barrier component was evident in the professional groups of doctors and nurses (p = 0.008). Moreover, the result showed that age group may contribute to the different perceptions of the team barriers: between 20-30 years and 31–40 years (p = 0,026), between 20 and 30 years and >50 years (p = 0,000), and between 31 and 40 years and >50 years (p = 0.001). Finally, there was a significant difference in the team barrier component based on the length of work experience: between those who had been working for 1–5 years with 5–10 years (p = 0.016) and those who had worked for >10 years (p = 0.006). Conclusion: This study showed that nurses perceived more barriers in practicing interprofessional collaborative care than other professionals. Staff in the younger age group with a shorter length of work experience perceived more obstacles than older people with longer lengths of work experience. Further research is needed to explore factors that may support or hinder interprofessional collaborative practice in Indonesia.