4858 Mental Health Report - National University of Ireland, Galway

Collaborative Practice and Policy
Respondents were also asked about the barriers to cross-border working. Again
they were given a number of items and responses were collapsed into agree,
disagree or uncertain. The results can be seen in Table 3:
Table 3: Barriers to Cross-border Working
Barriers to Cross-border Working % Agree % Disagree % Uncertain
Resource constraints 81.6 13.2 5.2
(geographical spread, distance, time etc) (n=31) (n=5) (n=2)
Issues of shared ownership 62.2 18.9 18.9
(n=23) (n=7) (n=7)
Differences in the structure and working 76.9 12.8 10.3
practices of the two health systems (n=30) (n=5) (n=4)
Building of trust between cross-border 62.8 20.0 17.2
partners (n=22) (n=7) (n=6)
Uncertainty of funding 79.5 2.6 17.9
(n=31) (n=1) (n=7)
Different currencies 33.3 56.4 10.3
(n=13) (n=22) (n=4)
Political and legal barriers 63.2 18.4 18.4
(n=24) (n=7) (n=7)
There was a little less consensus between the respondents with regard to the
barriers to cross-border working. The barriers agreed with by the majority of the
respondents were resource constraints (81.6%), uncertainty about funding
(79.5%) and differences in the structure and working practices of the two health
systems (76.9%). Only 33.3% (n=13) agreed that the different currencies in the
two jurisdictions could be seen as a barrier. Issues of shared ownership (18.9%),
political and legal barriers (18.4%) and uncertainty of funding (17.9%) had the
highest level of ‘uncertain’ responses.
Respondents were asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 10, where 0=of no importance
and 10=of great importance, the importance of evaluating the effectiveness of
the collaborative aspect of cross-border working. The mean result was 8.69
(sd=1.52), indicating that respondents felt that evaluation was very important.
Respondents were then asked what would help their organisation to evaluate the
effectiveness of the collaborative aspect of cross-border working. The supports
most commonly cited were time, training, and a clear agreed definition of the
aims and objectives of the collaborative aspect. Also mentioned was access to
existing models and information, including access to database and population
studies. Funding was also mentioned by many respondents as being a support
that would help the organisation evaluate this type of work.
70