Interprofessional education

About: Interprofessional education is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5456 publications have been published within this topic receiving 85165 citations.

Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice

Abstract: At a time when the world is facing a shortage of health workers, policymakers are looking for innovative strategies that can help them develop policy and programmes to bolster the global health workforce. The Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice highlights the current status of interprofessional collaboration around the world, identifies the mechanisms that shape successful collaborative teamwork and outlines a series of action items that policy-makers can apply within their local health system. The goal of the Framework is to provide strategies and ideas that will help health policy-makers implement the elements of interprofessional education and collaborative practice that will be most beneficial in their own jurisdiction.

Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (update)

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The delivery of effective, high-quality patient care is a complex activity. It demands health and social care professionals collaborate in an effective manner. Research continues to suggest that collaboration between these professionals can be problematic. Interprofessional education (IPE) offers a possible way to improve interprofessional collaboration and patient care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to separate, profession-specific education interventions; and to assess the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to no education intervention. SEARCH METHODS: For this update we searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register, MEDLINE and CINAHL, for the years 2006 to 2011. We also handsearched the Journal of Interprofessional Care (2006 to 2011), reference lists of all included studies, the proceedings of leading IPE conferences, and websites of IPE organisations. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before and after (CBA) studies and interrupted time series (ITS) studies of IPE interventions that reported objectively measured or self reported (validated instrument) patient/client or healthcare process outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of potentially relevant studies. For included studies, at least two review authors extracted data and assessed study quality. A meta-analysis of study outcomes was not possible due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures. Consequently, the results are presented in a narrative format. MAIN RESULTS: This update located nine new studies, which were added to the six studies from our last update in 2008. This review now includes 15 studies (eight RCTs, five CBA and two ITS studies). All of these studies measured the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to no educational intervention. Seven studies indicated that IPE produced positive outcomes in the following areas: diabetes care, emergency department culture and patient satisfaction; collaborative team behaviour and reduction of clinical error rates for emergency department teams; collaborative team behaviour in operating rooms; management of care delivered in cases of domestic violence; and mental health practitioner competencies related to the delivery of patient care. In addition, four of the studies reported mixed outcomes (positive and neutral) and four studies reported that the IPE interventions had no impact on either professional practice or patient care. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This updated review reports on 15 studies that met the inclusion criteria (nine studies from this update and six studies from the 2008 update). Although these studies reported some positive outcomes, due to the small number of studies and the heterogeneity of interventions and outcome measures, it is not possible to draw generalisable inferences about the key elements of IPE and its effectiveness. To improve the quality of evidence relating to IPE and patient outcomes or healthcare process outcomes, the following three gaps will need to be filled: first, studies that assess the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to separate, profession-specific interventions; second, RCT, CBA or ITS studies with qualitative strands examining processes relating to the IPE and practice changes; third, cost-benefit analyses.

Interprofessional teamwork: Professional cultures as barriers

Abstract: Each health care profession has a different culture which includes values, beliefs, attitudes, customs and behaviours. Professional cultures evolved as the different professions developed, reflecting historic factors, as well as social class and gender issues. Educational experiences and the socialization process that occur during the training of each health professional reinforce the common values, problem-solving approaches and language/jargon of each profession. Increasing specialization has lead to even further immersion of the learners into the knowledge and culture of their own professional group. These professional cultures contribute to the challenges of effective interprofessional teamwork. Insight into the educational, systemic and personal factors which contribute to the culture of the professions can help guide the development of innovative educational methodologies to improve interprofessional collaborative practice.

A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education: BEME Guide no. 9

Abstract: Background and review context: Evidence to support the proposition that learning together will help practitioners and agencies work better together remains limited and thinly spread. This review id...

Interprofessionality as the field of interprofessional practice and interprofessional education: An emerging concept

Abstract: This paper proposes a new concept and a frame of reference that should permit the development of a better understanding of a phenomenon that is the development of a cohesive and integrated health care practice among professionals in response to clients' needs. The concept is named "interprofessionality" and aims to draw a clear distinction with another concept, that of interdisciplinarity. The utilization of the concept of interdisciplinarity, which originally concerns the development of integrated knowledge in response to fragmented disciplinary knowledge, has caused some confusion. We need a concept that will specifically concern the development of a cohesive practice among different professionals from the same organization or from different organizations and the factors influencing it. There is no concept that focuses clearly on this field. Interprofessionality concerns the processes and determinants that influence interprofessional education initiatives as well as determinants and processes inherent to interprofessional collaboration. Interprofessionality also involves analysis of the linkages between these two spheres of activity. An attempt to bridge the gap between interprofessional education and interprofessional practice is long overdue; the two fields of inquiry need a common basis for analysis. To this end, we propose a frame of reference, an interprofessional education for collaborative patient-centred practice framework. The framework establishes linkages between the determinants and processes of collaboration at several levels, including links among learners, teachers and professionals (micro level), links at the organizational level between teaching and health organizations (meso level) and links among systems such as political, socio-economic and cultural systems (macro level). Research must play a key role in the development of interprofessionality in order to document these linkages and the results of initiatives as they are proposed and implemented. We also believe that interprofessionality will not be pursued without the requisite political will.