Discussion

The broad topic addressed interprofessional collaboration between healthcare professions. Each reviewer has their own profession Respiratory Therapy, Nursing, and Diagnostic Sonography. We are individually putting emphasis on our chosen profession, I would consider that to be a limitation. Each of us has to focus on our own career path, my profession is Respiratory Therapy. I had to limit my sections to focus more on this field. Focusing on Respiratory Therapy also fits in with the category of being biased, but it was intentional. Many of the articles only picked up the keyword respiratory therapy and did not focus on collaboration between healthcare professionals. I had to stay away from the articles that were too narrow in the topic. Reading and narrowing down articles was the most time consuming part of writing this systematic review. When selecting my articles and trying to modify each search I noticed that there was only one article that was not english, based on this information I did not miss out on an non-english publications. The articles that were chosen fit best with this systematic review based on each study’s population, intervention, and outcome. …show more content…
Look back to table 1 to confirm that each study was positive for collaboration helping out in their profession. Table 1 that was created based on my references really broke down the articles so you could quickly see the similarities and differences between all five articles chosen by reviewer 1. There were not many differences among each study, except for the intervention and population. Collaboration is practiced I believe that I have provided enough information, based on my selected references, to decide that interprofessional collaboration between healthcare professions is not only efficient but