IC/CC Health Care Models

It is inherently crucial for medical care providers to accept the importance of teamwork and the resultant collaboration in a setup that encompasses various human interfaces. A single patient may require the attention of several health services provider and hence the need for comprehensive communication plans (Auxier, Farley, & Seifert, 2011). The lack of effective teamwork collaboration creates room for errors that can, tragically, sustain injury and disease in patients. Medical errors have the possibility of negating any possible gain brought by therapeutic interventions in patients. The teams must indulge optimal peer pressure to achieve excellence and thus justify the need for the therapy sessions. Communication from health teams can support health literacy through the passage of accurate and verifiable information. According to the National Action Plan, such information must also be easily accessible and actionable (Auxier et al., 2011). By creating such a platform, the health teams will be supporting therapy sessions by increasing the knowledge capacity of all parties and most importantly, the patients. 

Even when the need and importance of integrated care (IC) and collaborative care (CC) is are clearly visible, there are various challenges on why and how such setups can fail. One, reduced government input can weaken the support systems of IC/CC frameworks. Such kind of support may include funding the IC/CC programs (Kelly & Coons, 2012). Secondly, improper or unethical professional practices by the concerned medical care providers can create collaborative gaps. The indulgence of cheeky and suspect behavior can discourage the participation of one party in the integrated process. For an IC/CC set-up to work, all components must firmly be in place. Lack of acceptance by stakeholders implies that the models will not be adopted in the first place neutralizing all their gains (Kelly & Coons, 2012). Reduced awareness by clinical members also feeds the reality that the services delivered in an environment devoid of key competencies will be shoddy. If that is the case, all medical interventions will not work placing the patients for catastrophic results such as fatalities and many hospital returns (London, Watson, & Berger, 2013). . The supportive intervention tactics include adherence to all policies and regulations including training requirements and clinician-patient appointments. Further, proper information distribution channels must be adopted to aid in, among others, optimal health literacy.

As highlighted earlier, integrated care and collaborative care are medical strategies keen on advancing effective care. However, primary care providers (PCPs) are not exempted from providing top-notch medical attention (Runyan, 2011). The first agenda needed in alleviating PCPs to the level of IC/CC providers in a way that can fill the gaps of the latter is through the transfer of enhanced communication skills. PCPs that have the ability to communicate well and properly with their patients assist in preventing a lot of medical errors. Further, the PCPs must understand the need to attain sufficient skills as a way of properly responding to the patients’ needs (Soklaridis, Kelner, Love, & Cassidy, 2009). One of the key areas where the APA Ethical Code of Conduct can guide practitioners is on competence. Section 2 of the code in the first clause advises psychologists to only offer their skills in their areas of qualifications. Such adherence can prevent all the possible errors. IC/CC can work well in children hospitals and mental institutions. The two patient clusters require specialized attention. All their various needs ranging from emotional to physical can be catered for in one roof. It is not logical to blend mental patients with sane ones as it is also not possible to treat children in adult hospitals. Those two examples underline the ever important need to keep on advancing IC/CC health care models.