Team Reflective Essay

As part of the Interprofessional Skills and Team-based healthcare (IPS) II course we received a case that narrated the events of a patient, named Ms. Eagan that arrived to the emergency room unresponsive with uncontrolled blood glucose and blood pressure. Each one of the members of our group received specific additional information related to our profession, which helped us as to come together and integrate our critical points of view to develop strategies on how to approach Ms. Eagan’s case and what measures to take. Our team initiated communication online through a group page. Using this initial strategy we where able to discuss our information and come to several conclusions on what happened to Ms. Eagan. Through this process I was able

We had a common goal, which was Ms. Eagans safety and wellbeing; we shared responsibilities in which each and every member proposed the next step to be done. Every member had equal authority and the sufficient hierarchy to be able to make decisions on the case. On the other hand, despite that our team overall performance was good there where some hazards that I was able to identify immediately after reading the chapter Excerpts from Understanding Teamwork in Healthcare. Our team worked basically virtually, which was convenient in our case, but I believe it is necessary to also have that “in-person” component. This allows members to have a personal feeling, to actually get to know each other, learn your teams weakness and strengths, which in turn will result in better future interactions. But for the purpose of the module meeting virtually was

This is mainly due to the fact that every individual and team performs different. This can be reflected mainly on what they consider the primary goal. In our case I noticed that our team was very focus on the patient’s well being, we wanted to do everything in our power to stabilize her and keep her alive. There was uncertainty that this was actually the patient’s wish, but we had to assume so since she was unresponsive. Overall the essence and answers where very much similar, except in some areas like the stakeholders, in which we focused more on stakeholders of the professions and their impact on the patient, rather than on the stakeholders in general of the patient. Based on these minor details I give our group overall grade of 96%, because I believe there were areas we could have answer better. The team communication was efficient and convenient until a certain point, but I believe that if we had meet personally at least twice, we could have had a better discussion and exchange of opinions that would have probably produced better