Exploring Frontline Workers Perception of Interprofessional Collaboration Within Drug Courts in Norway
A qualitative study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31265/gkz2yf23Keywords:
interprofessional collaboration, PINCOM, drug courts, substance abuse, frontline workers, NorwayAbstract
This qualitative study examines the perceptions of interprofessional collaboration among frontline workers involved in Norwegian drug courts. Using the Perception of Interprofessional Collaboration Model (PINCOM), and Goffman’s theory of front stage and backstage communication, the study explores the complexities and informal dynamics of collaboration processes. Semi-structured interviews with 16 frontline workers revealed key factors influencing collaboration, including motivation, personality style, group leadership, organizational culture, and organizational environment. Findings suggest that both formal and informal aspects of collaboration, such as physical proximity and interpersonal relationships, play significant roles in achieving successful outcomes. The study highlights the challenges of interprofessional collaboration in addressing the complex, multifaceted needs of drug court participants, and underscores the importance of continuous reflection on informal dynamics to enhance collaboration.
References
Barr, H. (2007). Interprofessional education: The fourth focus. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 21(sup2), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820701515335
Belenko, S. (2001). Research on drug courts: A critical review 2001 update. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
Bouffard, J. A., Richardson, K. A. & Franklin, T. (2010). Drug courts for DWI offenders? The effectiveness of two hybrid drug courts on DWI offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(1), 25-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2009.11.007
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Casula, M., Rangarajan, N. & Shields, P. (2020). The potential of working hypotheses for deductive exploratory research. Quality & Quantity, 55(5), 1703–1725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01072-9
Carey, S. M., Mackin, J. R. & Finigan, M. W. (2012). What works? The 10 key components of drug courts: Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 8(1), 6-42.
Cramer, V. (2014). Forekomst av psykiske lidelser hos domfelte i norske fengsler [Prevalence of Mental Disorders Among Convicted Individuals in Norwegian Prisons]. Oslo Universitetssykehus. https://sifer.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Forekomst_av_psykiske_lidelser_hos_domfelte_i_norske_fengsler.pdf
Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Debesay, J., Nåden, D. & Slettebø, Å. (2008). How do we close the hermeneutic circle? A Gadamerian approach to justification in interpretation in qualitative studies. Nursing Inquiry, 15(1), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1800.2008.00390.x
Directorate of Norwegian Correctional Service (2018). Retningslinjer for gjennomføring av narkotikaprogram med domstolskontroll [Guidelines for the Regulation on Drug Treatment with Court Supervision] (KDI-2018-9001). https://lovdata.no/pro/rundskriv/kdi-2018-9001
Doornebosch, A. J., Achterberg, W. P. & Smaling, H. J. A. (2024). Factors influencing interprofessional collaboration in general and during multidisciplinary team meetings in long-term care and geriatric rehabilitation: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Education, 24(285). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05291-8
Falck, S. (2014). Narkotikaprogram med domstolkontroll: En oppfølgingsstudie av 115 av de første klientene [Drug court: A study of the first 115 participants] (SIRUS report 4/2014). Norwegian Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research. https://www.fhi.no/globalassets/dokumenterfiler/rapporter/2014/sirusrap.4.14.pdf
Farringer, A. J. & Manchak, S. M. (2023). Communication and collaboration in a drug court team. Psychological Services, 20(4), 929–940. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000735
Fife, S. T. & Gossner, J. D. (2024). Deductive qualitative analysis: Evaluating, expanding, and refining theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241244856
Friestad, C. & Skog-Hansen, I. L. S. (2004). Levekår blant innsatte [Living Conditions Among Inmates] (Fafo-rapport 429). Fafo. https://www.fafo.no/media/com_netsukii/429.pdf
Gittell, J. H., Weinberg, D., Bennett, A. & Miller, J. A. (2008). Is the doctor in? A relational approach to job design and the coordination of work. Human Resource Management, 47(4), 729–755. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20242
Hansen, G. V. (2015). Can collaboration provide integrated services for prisoners in Norway? International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 4(4), 136–149. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v4i4.242
Holloway, I. & Galvin, K. (2016). Qualitative research in nursing and healthcare (4th ed.). Wiley Blackwell.
Johnsen, B. & Svendsen, M. (2007). Narkotikaprogram med domstolskontroll (ND): Oppstarten av teamene og sentrene 2006 [Drug courts and the start of drug court centers 2006]. University College of Norwegian Correctional Service. https://img3.custompublish.com/getfile.php/502689.823.wcquuyytdf/dok22007.pdf?return=kriminalomsorgen.custompublish.com
Kearley, B. W., Cosgrove, J. A., Wimberly, A. S. & Gottfredson, D. C. (2019). The impact of drug court participation on mortality: 15-year outcomes from a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 105, 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2019.07.004
Larsen, B. K. & Hean, S. (2021). The significance of interprofessional and interagency collaboration in reintegration after prison: A qualitative study exploring Norwegian frontline workers’ views. Journal of Comparative Social Work, 16(1), 109–134. https://doi.org/10.31265/jcsw.v16i1.366
Larsen, B. K. & Ødegård, A. (2024). Resettlement after prison for prisoners with substance abuse issues in Norway: A wicked problem?. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2372066
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service (30th anniversary ed.). Russell Sage Foundation.
Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T. & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997–2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34(3), 410–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316061
Mitchell, M., Wilson, D. B., Eggers, A. & MacKenzie, D. L. (2012). Assessing the effectiveness of drug courts on recidivism: A meta-analytic review of traditional and non-traditional drug courts. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.11.009
Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security (2005). Lov om straff (straffeloven) [Criminal Law (Penal Code)] (LOV-2005-05-20-28] Lovdata. https://lovdata.no/lov/2005-05-20-28
Reeves, S. (2023). Sosiologisk forståelse av tverrprofesjonell utdanning og praksis [A sociological understanding of interprofessional collaboration in education and practice]. In E. Willumsen & A. Ødegård (Eds.), Tverrprofesjonelt samarbeid: Et samfunnsoppdrag [Interprofessional collaboration: A social mission] (3rd ed., pp. 141–153). Universitetsforlaget.
Reeves, S., Pelone, F., Goldman, J. & Zwarenstein, M. (2017). Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017(6), CD000072. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000072.pub3
Revold, M. K. (2015). Innsattes levekår 2014: Før, under og etter soning [Inmates’ Living Conditions 2014: Before, During and After Imprisonment] (Rapporter 2015/47). Statistisk sentralbyrå. https://www.ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-publikasjoner/innsattes-levekar-2014
Seim, I. (2018). The Norwegian drug court model: An alternative to incarceration for criminal drug addicts. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 31(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1525/fsr.2018.31.1.21
Tjora, A. (2017). Kvalitative forskningsmetoder i praksis [Qualitative research methods in practice] (3rd ed.). Gyldendal Norsk Forlag AS.
van Wormer, J., Holbrook, M. A., Lu, R., Lutze, F. & Mei, X. (2020). Collaboration within drug courts: A national survey of drug court professionals. Justice Evaluation Journal, 3(2), 178–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/24751979.2020.1744470
Wenzel, S. L., Turner, S. F. & Ridgerly, S. M. (2004). Collaborations between drug courts and service providers: Characteristics and challenges. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32(3), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2004.02.005
Yusra, R. Y., Findyartini, A. & Soemantri, D. (2019). Healthcare professionals’ perceptions regarding interprofessional collaborative practice in Indonesia. Journal of Interprofessional Education & Practice, 15, 24–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xjep.2019.01.005
Ødegård, A. (2006). Exploring perceptions of interprofessional collaboration in child mental health care. International Journal of Integrated Care, 6, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.165
Ødegård, A. & Bjørkly, S. (2012). A mixed method approach to clarify the construct validity of interprofessional collaboration: An empirical research illustration. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 26(4), 283–288. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2011.652784
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bjørn Kjetil Larsen, Atle Ødegård
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.