Nursing Case Study: Team Work Collaboration Protocols

Question

Task:
First section- In the 3rd person Write about an experience you have had as a student on placement, with use of an appendix to place these details. This incident is one that needs to be linked to issues of collaborative practice and relates to taught elements of the module, to more fully understand the underlying issues that can impact (either positively or negatively) on ensuring the service user remains central to all processes. It needs to be emphasized to all students, that it is not about blame apportioning, but about understanding and being able to be more affective as part of a team. The needs to be some discussion about the importance of service users in relation to multi-agency teams. There needs to be evidence of relating your practice experience to theory, taught during the module.

Second Section- In 1st person: a reflective piece that clearly identifies and utilises a chosen reflective model. You should briefly introduce and explain the reflective model at the beginning of the assignment, but ensure that you refer to it throughout the assignment and use it as a framework for your reflections. The focus of the reflective piece is you as an individual identifying your strengths and areas of development as a future professional in collaborative practice. You make reference to the group work activities you were involved in, and how that has increased your understanding of collaboration. Use the reflective model and evaluations as an individual and as a group, as a guide, for example, what have you learnt during the course and how that will inform future practice. Again, there needs to be evidence of basing your experience to theory.

I shall be reflecting on my strengths and area of development as a student nurse working in a group with the other student professionals. Modern health care is built on the positives that strong teamwork brings. Health care teams bring together people with different skills, abilities and talents in the pursuit of a common goal – the best possible care and treatment for patients/clients. This refection is based on a group work activity that I was involved. ( ) Reflection provides both individuals, small groups and teams with the opportunity to establish connections between new and existing knowledge and to deepen their level of understanding through self-discovery and learning through active experimentation. I will be using Gibbs reflective cycle. The reason I have chosen this reflective model is because it explicit the need for conclusions and action planning ( ).

Stage one: Description of the event
I was in a group of six second year students from different health care professionals. I have identified a group as collective consisting of one or two people with a common interest ( ). ( ) further explains a group as two or more people working together, interacting and interdependent having common goals. The group had an occupational therapist, social worker, mental health nurse, adult nurse and children nurse. RCN (2017) explains, the advantage of such multiciliary team is that patients/clients gets access to all the skills and expertise they need. Each student had had a different placement experience. We had to work on a presentation that was to be delivered in less than a week. This was to help us identify strength and weakness as individuals and as a group in collaborative practice. World Health Organisation (WHO) (2010) defines Collaborative practice as a situation that occurs “when multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds work together with patients, families, carers, and communities to deliver the highest quality of care.” Each person in the group was given a topic to research on and then join everything together for the presentation. We put together ground rules and set up a messenger group where we could communicate and post information.

Stage two: Feelings What were your reactions and feelings? Again, don’t move on to analysing just yet.
Working in a small group made me feel confident to communicate ( ). Casey A (2011) explains, communication is central to human interaction and it is a way people relate to those around them, make their needs and concerns known. I felt anxious about having to be in a group with people I do not know and have any kind of a friendly approach with. As a mature student I felt I had to take the initiative to introduce myself and get to know my group. Tuchman (1965) explains how teams develop through four stages. Forming is the first stage members of a team or group go through before moving unto the next phase. This was reflected when my group introduced each other and the group becoming adapted to each other. At this stage the team members including myself have been very nice to each other but at the same time there were unseen possible conflicts. The norming stage; we all looked at our given topic and started to delegate each member a task to do. everyone’s opinion was valued, the group discussed and planned on how we were going to present the presentation.

Stage three: Evaluation
What was good or bad about the experience.

Stage four: Analysis
What sense can you make of the situation? Bring in ideas from outside the experience to help you. What was really going on? Were different peoples experience similar? How did they vary?

Stage five: Conclusions
What can be concluded, in a general sense from these experiences? What can be concluded about your own specific, unique, personal situation? During this stage you should ask yourself what you could have done differently. Remember the purpose of reflection is to learn from an experience.

Stage six: Action Plan
What are you going to do differently in this type of situation next time? What steps are you going to take to ensure you have learned from this experience? Do

Answer

Section 1
Introduction: Collaboration in the team working protocols plays a majorly significant role, as this principle is essential for meeting the distinctive requirements of the service users in every professional field. Fulfilment of various desires, expectations, and requirements of the service users imposes the necessity of collaborative working on the service providers. On the other hand, over the recent few years, the modern population undergoes through some complicated health requirements, therefore, it becomes impossible to support them through a specific area of specialisation. Therefore, among all the other professional fields, the area of healthcare mostly requires collaborative team working, which is the main highlighted point of this assignment. The study sheds light on a case study, named as ‘Huddle Time’ [Refer to Appendix], based on which the effectiveness and requirements of collaborative multi-agency team working would be discussed.

Importance of collaboration in multi-agency teams
Through defining by some simple terms, multi-agency working procedure involves different expertise professionals from different fields or different departments of same field, for providing an integrated way of care service provisions, especially for supporting the health-affected population. According to the statement of Hesjedal, Hetland & Iversen (2015), multi-agency working process can ensure about the fact that people requiring additional supports would get sufficient attention for managing the adversities of public health. As per some of the previous research papers, multi-agency teams, especially involved in the healthcare profession, require inclusion of various types of professional, such as social workers, physicians, general doctors, pharmacists, nurses, youth workers, and so on. Therefore, it is harder to manage all the professionals at a single opinion or perception, regarding any specific matter. Henceforth, in case of healthcare multi-agency team working collaboration is effectively and essentially required.

Through considering the case study described in the Appendix section, it can be stated that the members included in the Huddle time weekly meetings remain attached and developed a type motivational relationship. Based on some evidential description of the case study, the importance or purposes of collaboration in the multi-agency team working are given as follows-

• Collaboration would help people in solving multiple problems at a single time, without taking any in-between processing time. As in the meeting, all the care workers have the right of explaining their needs and issues, based on which all the other members might support in reducing the time of internal conflicts and enhancing the relaxed environment among the team.
• Collaboration can support the togetherness among the organisational members or members belong from similar field, due to which the interaction becomes transient (Reeves et al. 2017). Such as, since the weekly Huddle Time is generally arranged at the noontime, therefore, the members often try to take their lunch together. In summer days, they share fresh fruits, ice creams or freshly baked cakes among the members.
• Professional improvement becomes easier for the dedicated experts, as they can learn different things from the other team members. Novice care staffs might get the opportunity of learning new care tactics from the experienced providers.
• Opening new types of communication channels and boosting the morale of members can be considered as one of the main purpose of collaborative working, as it can enhance the productivity level. For example, the authority generally arranges publishing of full meeting report and Skype communication for the people having issues in attending the meetings.
• Continuous improvement in professional expertise areas, togetherness, communicational bonding, and motivation, all of the factors make employees more efficient in their working fields (Berber et al. 2016).

Factors driving collaborative team working
There are number of factors, which have positive or negative impacts on the collaborative environment. Based on the statement of Liberati, Gorli & Scaratti (2016), the Huddle time members need to relate with all the factors, for understanding the direction of their meeting, which is effectively positive in this case. The multi-agency workers, such as the nurses, GPs, dispensary teams, and other departmental members involved in this meeting can contribute according to their designations, such as for discussing some critical situations, requirements of some advanced treatment provisions, and so on. However, the case study reflects that the positive mindset of the members helps in making a positive vibe during the meeting, which is an effective factor of collaboration. There are many other factors, which are given in the following section-

Table 1: Factors influencing collaborative practices
(Source: Created by learner)

Through considering the above-mentioned factors, it can be stated that almost all the factors positively integrated in the case study of Huddle Time. For example, the members involved in the meeting all have sufficient respect and trust towards each other, which leads to the enhancement of effective collaborative culture among them. In the meeting, every member have equal rights and responsibilities, and they need to explain the problems or opportunities they have undergone through the previous 2 weeks. On the other hand, equal rights given to the members is another positive factor of this meeting, as all the information are generally sent through the different communication channels, especially for the employees having no duties in the last two weeks or employees having difficulties in coming to the meeting.

The evidence of this meeting suggest that the it does not include any specific organisational members, it generally include all the care professionals available in the surrounding regions, thereby, they generally work for fulfilling a shared purpose, which is improvement in the overall public health (Sims, Hewitt & Harris, 2015). This overall health target would help in proper evaluation of the current practices, in order to identify the flaws and consult for covering the gaps. Apart from this, the team leaders of the meetings often try to understand the happiness level of the members, as the happiness and mental satisfaction of the good collaborative environment encourage them and maintain their interest level on this compulsory meeting, after passing the pressurised weekdays.

Common issues and its consequences
From the above two sections, it can be easily assumed that the entire multi-agency healthcare process is highly dependent on the team collaboration, which is properly reflected from the Huddle time meeting story. However, as per the contradictory viewpoint of Dudzinski & Piazza (2016), there are several negative consequences, in case of the absence of collaborative practices. Absence of collaboration often influences the team working capabilities, and therefore, the productivity level of the healthcare sector start degrading. Some of negative events and its impacts are described as follows-

Table 2: Common issues and its consequence
(Source: Created by learner)

Strategies for maintaining collaboration
Therefore, in order to eliminate the possibility of reduced collaboration and enhanced effective multi-agency team working, the Huddle time members would necessarily follow some strategies, such as-

• At the ground level, the first meeting is required to be done for outlining the purposes of the future meeting, along with reflecting on the true collaborative parameters. Cawkwell, Talbot & Boylan (2016) mentioned that everyone need to understand the common goods of the process, not by measuring the goodness of team, either by measuring the collaborative outcomes.
• The meeting leaders and coordinators need to encourage and motivate them to speak their own, as they are not just the passive listeners; they are active members of decision-making process. Therefore, they have the rights of speaking their minds, and through this, the collaborative environment could be maintained.
• It is essential to ensure that all the ideas and concepts are properly being discussed among the team members, along with sufficient clarification of the detailed information. Apart from this, it is also necessary to involve everyone for evaluating the perceptions, as consultation about a newly implemented process or idea is essential for achieving success (Bosanquet et al. 2016). Besides this, hearing the voices of employees is also required for gaining more innovative and fresh ideas about the team working procedures or services.
• Like the Huddle time team members, every organisational people might avoid such conflicts in relational bonding, through following the process of introducing selves to others. As the team members introduce the new team members in every meeting, along with this, King et al. (2017) mentioned giving opportunity of introducing self is also useful in such cases, as it can improve the collaborative environment.
• Implementation of some effective communication mediums and channels are essential for the multi-agency team members, through which they become aware about the culture, perspectives, and some other characteristics of the team members. In case of ground label position, it is necessary to conduct frequent meeting for increasing the communication among them. It would be beneficial for them to become an effective collaborative multi-agency team in the upcoming future.

Conclusion
Therefore, based on the entire analysis and discussion about the case study of Huddle Time, it can be stated that the environment created by the members of the meeting is approachable and precious, for both their personal and professional lives. They learn a lots of things from this periodic meeting session, along with enhancing their personal capacities regarding team working, collaboration, cooperation, and communication. Like this, application of such meeting or similar types of interactive sessions would help the other field workers in implicating collaboration, along with gaining competitive advantage through being a proper multi-agency team. Nursing case study assignments are being prepared by our Nursing assignment help experts from top universities which let us to provide you a reliable best assignment help service.

Section 2: I shall be reflecting on my strengths and area of development as a student nurse working in a group with the other student professionals. Modern health care is built on the positives that strong teamwork brings. Health care teams bring together people with different skills, abilities and talents in the pursuit of a common goal – the best possible care and treatment for patients/clients. This refection is based on a group work activity that I was involved. Farrell & Ives (2015) Reflection provides both individuals, small groups and teams with the opportunity to establish connections between new and existing knowledge and to deepen their level of understanding through self-discovery and learning through active experimentation. I will be using Gibbs reflective cycle. The reason I have chosen this reflective model is because it explicit the need for conclusions and action planning.

Stage 1: Description of the event
I was in a group of six-second year students from different health care professionals. I have identified a group as collective consisting of one or two people with a common interest. Johns (2017) further explains a group as two or more people working together, interacting and interdependent having common goals. The group had an occupational therapist, social worker, mental health nurse, adult nurse and children nurse. Horton-Deutsch & Sherwood (2017) explains, the advantage of such multi-disciplinary team is that patients/clients gets access to all the skills and expertise they need. Each student had had a different placement experience. We had to work on a presentation that was to be delivered in less than a week. This was to help us identify strength and weakness as individuals and as a group in collaborative practice. World Health Organisation (WHO) (2010) defines Collaborative practice as a situation that occurs “when multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds work together with patients, families, carers, and communities to deliver the highest quality of care.” Each person in the group was given a topic to research on and then join everything together for the presentation. We put together ground rules and set up a messenger group where we could communicate and post information.

Stage 2: Feelings
Working in a small group made me feel confident to communicate. Patton & Kinsella (2018) explains, communication is central to human interaction and it is a way people relate to those around them, make their needs and concerns known. I felt anxious about having to be in a group with people I do not know and have any kind of a friendly approach with. As a mature student, I felt I had to take the initiative to introduce myself and get to know my group. Johnston (2017) explain show teams develop through four stages. Forming is the first stage members of a team or group go through before moving unto the next phase. This was reflected when my group introduced each other and the group becoming adapted to each other. At this stage, the team members including myself have been very nice to each other but at the same time, there were unseen possible conflicts. The norming stage; we all looked at our given topic and started to delegate each member a task to do. Everyone’s opinion was valued, the group discussed and planned on how we were going to present the presentation.

Stage 3: Evaluation
As per my evaluation about the group working procedure, I think all the team members, including me, have obtained sufficient benefits. One of the first benefits was that we have learnt about the process of group communication, especially while making plans for our projects. As per the influential viewpoint of Knott & Scragg (2016), I would explore different communication channels, for establishing rapports with my team members, such as face-to-face formal communication, informal communication, Skype interviews, and so on. Furthermore, I think the concept of collaborative working would also help us to improve our professional characteristics, through which I got sufficient opportunities of enhancing my career aspects. I have obtained knowledge regarding the Tuckman Theory of Team Development, along with the four stages, like forming, storming, norming, and performing.

Apart from this, the integration of collaboration and communication has made us a better team, and we started understanding each other’s viewpoints, ideas, and try to support them in effective points required for completing our group tasks. Additional to this, I have learnt that small groups are more effective in conducting quick projects, as communication becomes less restrained and less complicated among the team members. However, based on the contradictory statement of Gould & Taylor (2017), some potential drawbacks I have identified that we became habituated about the process of group thinking, therefore, we often provide approval to some thoughts without evaluating its benefits or limitations. Thus, it can be stated that such group thinking process is beneficial for some extent, but complete relying on the group thinking process might reduce personal capacities of evaluation.

Stage 4: Analysis
From the above contexts, I can make a simple sense that the process of collaboration and communication is significant for improving team working capacities, enhancing professional characteristics, and opening broader ways for career improvement. As per the viewpoint of Gould & Taylor (2017), the process of internal learning is effective for me, and I think for every team members with whom I was involved. This process supported us to understand the conflicted areas, which might appear while working with team, and the process of overcoming the conflicts. Additional to this, I think it is essential to focus on the group working principles and theoretical frameworks, such as Tuckman’s Team development theory, which we have learnt during this process. However, as per my understanding, I think the level of learning and understanding varied among the team members, as it is dependent on the different perceptions and behavioural patterns of the individual people.

Besides this, I think we could not gain such positive outcomes from this process, as several smaller negative points remain hidden under the overall positive points. For example, I can state one of my personal experiences, as the mental health nurse and me felt difficulties while I required dealing with Chinese service users, as I did not have knowledge regarding this language. Among the rest 5 members, almost 4 could talk in Chinese language also, therefore, they did not face any issue. Since majority of the team members can communicate in this language, therefore, the college authorities did not take any initiative for giving us training in such aspects. As per the influential viewpoint of Lopez & Villabona (2016), majority-minority issue has influenced our progressive way of professional improvement.

Stage 5: Conclusions
Therefore, based on the general viewpoint, it can be concluded that collaboration in the multi-agency working process is essential, for reaching to the professional goals of individual team members. Along with this, it becomes beneficial for improving the productivity level of the individual team members and the entire group as well, through which the performance level of the organisation might become improved. The learnt communication theory and group working theory might help in assuming the suitability of other theoretical frameworks in different situational prospects. Additional to this, as per the comment of Rosé et al. (2019), it is necessary to explore my personal specific, unique, and integrated situations, which I have learnt from the reflective analysis process. As per my understanding, the strongest point of my professional character is I have enough flexibility, as I could adapt any types of situation appeared during the project period. For example, since we have to make the presentation in just a week, therefore, I have adopted all the necessary skills regarding the power-point presentation. However, less sufficient knowledge regarding other language might become a restraint factor for me in the future careers.

Stage 6: Action Plan
Through considering the above discussion, I have ensured that I have learnt about different elements of collaboration and its consequence, especially in case of multi-agency working. Apart from this, I have learnt about the fundamental process of group presentation, along with finishing the work within deadline. On the other hand, based on the analysis and evaluation, I think that I need to work on my interpersonal skills, such as communication skill, collaborative skills and time management skills, which I could apply during the future group working procedures. Therefore, I have planned to attain some vocational training programs, in which I can learn about different communication techniques from the expert communicators (Gruenhagen, 2017). Besides this, I would also learn different language from the communication coaching centres, which would improve my ability as a professional clinical expert in the upcoming time. Furthermore, I think it is necessary to participate actively in the further group projects, for assuring that my performance level have been improved from the previous time. However, as the conclusion, I think I need to maintain my continuous learning procedure through gaining knowledge from different multi-agency collaborative group works.

Reference List
Berber, R., Skinner, J., Board, T., Kendoff, D., Eskelinen, A., Kwon, Y. M., ... & Hart, A. (2016). International metal-on-metal multidisciplinary teams: do we manage patients with metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty in the same way? An analysis from the International Specialist Centre Collaboration on MOM Hips (ISCCoMH). The bone & joint journal, 98(2), 179-186. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1491797/1/Hart_Manuscript%20-%20International%20MDT%20FINAL%20-%20REVISED1.pdf

Bosanquet, D. C., Stather, P., Sidloff, D. A., Dattani, N., Shalhoub, J., Pancholi, J., ... & Lear, R. (2016). How to engage in trainee-led multicentre collaborative vascular research: the Vascular and Endovascular Research Network (VERN). European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 52(3), 392. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://www.ejves.com/article/S1078-5884(16)30242-8/fulltext

Cawkwell, J., Talbot, A., & Boylan, M. (2016). Beginning collaborative learning: student and staff perspectives on its value and challenges. Student Engagement and Experience Journal, 5(1). Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://rke.abertay.ac.uk/files/15237783/Talbot_BeginningCollaborativeLearning_Published_2018.pdf

Dudzinski, D. M., & Piazza, G. (2016). Multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams. Circulation, 133(1), 98-103. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.015086

Gould, N., & Taylor, I. (2017). Reflective learning for social work: research, theory and practice. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Gruenhagen, L. M. (2017). Developing musical creativity through reflective and collaborative practices. Music Educators Journal, 103(3), 40-45. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0027432116685158

Hesjedal, E., Hetland, H., & Iversen, A. C. (2015). Interprofessional collaboration: self?reported successful collaboration by teachers and social workers in multidisciplinary teams. Child & Family Social Work, 20(4), 437-445. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/cfs.12093

Horton-Deutsch, S., & Sherwood, G. D. (2017). Reflective practice: Transforming education and improving outcomes (Vol. 2). Sigma Theta Tau.

Johns, C. (Ed.). (2017). Becoming a reflective practitioner. John Wiley & Sons. Johnston, C. (2017). Reflective practice. Teaching Business & Economics, 21(1), 19-21.

King, N., Bravington, A., Brooks, J., Melvin, J., & Wilde, D. (2017). “Go make your face known”: Collaborative working through the lens of personal relationships. International journal of integrated care, 17(4). Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://ijic.ubiquitypress.com/articles/10.5334/ijic.2574/?toggle_hypothesis=on

Knott, C., & Scragg, T. (Eds.). (2016). Reflective practice in social work. Learning Matters.

Liberati, E. G., Gorli, M., & Scaratti, G. (2016). Invisible walls within multidisciplinary teams: disciplinary boundaries and their effects on integrated care. Social Science & Medicine, 150, 31-39. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953615302628

Lopez, L. M., & Villabona, F. M. (2016). Teachers’ professional development in the context of collaborative research: Toward practices of collaborative assessment for learning in the classroom. In Assessment for learning: Meeting the challenge of implementation (pp. 161-180). Springer, Cham. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-39211-0_10

Morgan, S., Pullon, S., & McKinlay, E. (2015). Observation of interprofessional collaborative practice in primary care teams: an integrative literature review. International journal of nursing studies, 52(7), 1217-1230. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from http://www.academia.edu/download/41757304/Observation_of_interprofessional_collabo20160129-10693-1rhuju.pdf

Morgan, S., Pullon, S., & McKinlay, E. (2015). Observation of interprofessional collaborative practice in primary care teams: an integrative literature review. International journal of nursing studies, 52(7), 1217-1230. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from http://www.academia.edu/download/41757304/Observation_of_interprofessional_collabo20160129-10693-1rhuju.pdf

Reeves, S., Pelone, F., Harrison, R., Goldman, J., & Zwarenstein, M. (2017). Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (6). Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://eprints.kingston.ac.uk/38453/1/Reeves-S-38453-VoR.pdf

Rosé, C. P., Law, N., Cress, U., & Ludvigsen, S. (2019). Highlighting tools and technologies for collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(1), 1-6. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11412-019-09297-z

Sims, S., Hewitt, G., & Harris, R. (2015). Evidence of collaboration, pooling of resources, learning and role blurring in interprofessional healthcare teams: a realist synthesis. Journal of Interprofessional care, 29(1), 20-25. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/13561820.2014.939745

Streeton, A., Bisbey, C., O'Neill, C., Allen, D., O'Hara, S., Weinhold, M., ... & Grubbs, P. (2016). Improving nurse-physician teamwork: A multidisciplinary collaboration. Medsurg Nursing, 25(1), 31. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from http://search.proquest.com/openview/cd3391f026cb154793c9c8a5c3b984b8/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=30764

Vick, T. E., Nagano, M. S., & Popadiuk, S. (2015). Information culture and its influences in knowledge creation: Evidence from university teams engaged in collaborative innovation projects. International Journal of Information Management, 35(3), 292-298. Retrieved on 11 June 2019, from http://iranarze.ir/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/9263-English-IranArze.pdf

Appendix: Huddle time
The placement I will be using for my assignment had meetings they called Huddle time. One huddle was every day at 11:00 for staff at the GP practice. The other was once every two weeks, which included the district nurses, physiotherapist, social worker, occupational health and other healthcare workers. Huddle time that was held every day was mainly for the practice, looking at what needed to be done and any changes and reports. The huddle time I will be writing about is the one that was held once every two weeks.

These meetings were held at mostly in the afternoon over lunch and after most home visits and morning clinics. The team would have two patients that they would focus on with each meeting. Most of the time the patients GP would be present and they would be leading the meeting. A few times the nurse would also lead. A report of all the care interventions within the two weeks would be read to the group. Everyone has the chance to talk and discuss the challenges and any improvements they would have encountered. In some cases the dispensary team would also be involved (explaining how some dressings or medications have been delayed or changed). The rest of the care staff who would have not been physical involved with the patient within the two weeks would have a full update and a report came on the system explaining any interventions. They had a Skype system for those who could not come in for the meeting.

Everyone is free to contribute to the dissection. In One meeting the student added and supported the district nurses information about a house visit she was involved. Before they moved to the next patient, the GP would ask each individual if they were happy with what would have been discussed and the planned. The huddle time had a good atmosphere, and everyone would be relaxed. Most of the time everyone would be having their lunch and at times someone would have baked a cake to share. In summer, there were ice-creams and fresh fruit that staff would have brought from their gardens. New student (nurse, doctors, social workers, etc) would be introduced to the team and the length of time they will be with the team. Anyone would be happy to have the students shadow them.