You Do What? Interprofessional Education for Improved Teamwork in the Real World

1. You Do What? Interprofessional Education for Improved Teamwork in the Real World by Sheila R. Krajnik Kate Brennan Rebecca Epperly Kerry Vandergrift Waldron College of Health and Human Services Radford University

2. Learning Objectives Upon completion of this session, participants will be able to: • Explain the trends and value of interprofessional education for today’s workplace. • Discuss effective interprofessional learning approaches. • Identify content and process elements of interprofessional learning activities that facilitate student engagement within their own disciplines. • Develop a broad concept of an interprofessional learning session, specific to their own disciplines, using a case study.

3. What does the literature say? • Trends • Definitions • Developments & Growth in Higher Ed • Assessment of learning • Outcomes

4. IPE Defined • Varied terminology: • interdisciplinary; multidisciplinary; team or group; transdisciplinary; professional community. • “Interprofessional” is more recent: • People from different disciplines collaborate on common products or service outcomes (Guile, 2012). • Objectives of interprofessional work integration • Resolve real world or complex problems; • Provide different perspectives on problems; • Create comprehensive approaches & solutions; • Develop consensus on definitions & guidelines; • Provide comprehensive & effective services and/or products.

5. IPE Defined • Interprofessional Education • Occasions when two or more professions learn with, from, and about each other to improve collaboration and the quality of services and/or outcomes (Reeves et al. 2012). • Professionals need education & training to provide them with the attitudes, knowledge, skills, and behaviors needed to work effectively together to deliver expected outcomes. • Traditional “uniprofessional” approach to professions education is insufficient to support effective collaboration (tribal approach; teaching in ‘silos’; ). • IPE is not students learning to do the roles of other professionals, but how to integrate their own professional role with others for an improved outcome.

6. Development of IPE • Gained prominence within last 3 decades; • Grew out of shifts in global industry: • from less complex individual work → more complex multi-person projects. • More horizontal coordination of work processes & decreasing hierarchical coordination. • Majority of IPE remains in the workplace; • Rapidly increasing trend of IPE in higher education to address: • Understanding of other’s roles; • Skills for collaboration & communication; • Self-efficacy for interacting with colleagues.

7. Examples in Higher Education • Bioinformatics: biology; computer science; math & statistics. • Architects; engineers, project managers. • Film crews. • Sustainable business: biology; engineering; social entrepreneurship; architecture. • Healthcare & Social Services: nursing; physician; pharmacy; social work; psychology. • Health & Rehabilitation: Nursing; occupational therapy; physical therapy; speech therapy; therapeutic recreation. • Many health professions examples.

8. IPE Learning Approaches • Requires explicit interprofessional interaction between participants/students. • Interactive learning approaches • Case-based problem solving; • Laboratory & Simulation-based learning; • Small group discussion; • Practice-based learning (service placements) • eLearning (online discussions)

9. Assessment & Outcomes of IPE • IPE outcomes model (Freeth et al. 2002) • Level 1: assess participant reactions; • Level 2: evaluate change in attitudes or perceptions; • Level 3: assess behavioral change; • Level 4: evaluate change in organizational practice & benefits to customer. • Increasing evidence of effectiveness of IPE; • Most studies in higher education evaluate Levels 1 & 2; • Majority of learners report positive reactions toward participation; • Positive changes in perceptions & attitudes, knowledge, & skills of collaboration & communication; • Positive changes in interprofessional collaboration, & enhanced understanding of roles; • IPE should be integrated into pre-professional programs.

10. WCHHS Interdisciplinary Symposia • Idea Germination • Committee Formation • Spring 2012; Fall 2012; Spring 2013 • Process • Content

11. WCHHS IPE Symposium: Process • Faculty recruitment • Format • Student recruitment • Communication • Web-based D2L • Issues of jargon, turf and hierarchies

12. WCHHS IPE Symposium: Content • Case study approach • Elderly woman after a stroke • 3 year old girl with cerebral palsy • Assessment data from each discipline

13. WCHHS IPE Symposium: Group Process • Discussion of scope of practice • Development of problem list • Identification of distinct and overlapping responsibilities • Jargon, turf, hierarchies

14. WCHHS: Assessment • Pre- and Post-Learning Questionnaire • Self-report • 5-point Likert scale • Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree • 12 “Knowledge” items; • 19 “Attitude/Perception” items (Readiness for Inter-Professional Learning). • Post-Learning Questionnaire also included 4 qualitative items.

15. WCHHS: Findings • N = 121 • Statistically significant increase in knowledge of own & other’s roles (t=10.70; p=.000). • Statistically significant positive change in attitudes & perceptions toward team learning & working (t=2.99; p=.004) • Increase in frequency of Strongly Agree/Agree responses across all items.

16. WCHHS: Findings • The best thing about the symposium was: • Learning (75): “Learning about each profession and how they relate to mine in treating a patient.” • Collaboration (52): “Being able to collaborate with students in other professions.” • Unity (14): “Being one team!!!” • Personal and professional growth (12): “Gaining confidence to speak out in a group setting.” • Logistics (7): “Food.”

17. WCHHS: Findings • When you have the Symposium again please make the following changes: • Materials and information (28) • Structure (26) • Logistics (21) • Add disciplines (20) • Discuss how you felt participating with other disciplines in providing client/patient care: • Overwhelmingly positive • “great opportunity” “Loved it” “very rewarding”“great experience” “This was very beneficial” “Thoroughly enjoyed it”

18. WCHHS: Findings • The thing I learned about another discipline’s practice that I didn’t know was: • Discipline specific information (66): • “SLP’s work with literacy.” • “Social work: finding outside/community resources for the family.” • “understanding the difference between OT & PT.” • “Nurses can do respiratory care also.” • All disciplines (29): “How much overlap there is between the disciplines.” • Practical knowledge (9): “Acronyms”

19. Your Turn: Interprofessional Experience • Who is on YOUR team? How do disciplines compliment each other? Do you have common work settings or project outcomes? • What vital skills would you like to foster? • What scenarios or case studies would promote the goals you have for your students?

20. Sharing Group ideas

21. Lessons learned • Start early • Recruit flexible, committed faculty • Gain leadership support • Identify funding if needed for food or printing • Details, details, details • Planning time • Space available • Group leaders • Food

22. Thank You for Participating! References • Ali, M. (2012). Development of a course sequence for an interdisciplinary curriculum. Higher Education Studies, 2(3), 1-8. doi:10.5539/hes.v2n3p1 • Choi, B. C. K., & Pak, A. W. P. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical & Investigative Medicine, 29, 351- 364. Retrieved from http://cimonline.ca/index.php/cim • Dufrene, C. (2012). Health care partnerships: A literature review of interdisciplinary education. The Journal of Nursing Education, 51, 212-216. doi:10.3928/01484834-20120224-01 • Graybeal, C., Long, R., Scalise-Smith, D., & Zeibig, E. (2010). The art and science of interprofessionaleducation. Journal of Allied Health, 39, 232-237. Retrieved from http://www.asahp.org/journal_ah.htm • Guile, D. (2012). Inter-professional working and learning: ‘Recontextualising’ lessons from ‘project work’ for programmes of initial professional formation. Journal of Education and Work, 25(1), 79-99. doi:10/1080/13639080.2012.644908 • Izberk-Bilgin, E., Klein, B. D., Chandra, C., Lee, H., Susko, D., Lee, M., & Zikanov, O. (2012). A multidisciplinary team-teaching approach to sustainable business education. Journal of Case Studies in Education, 3, 1-19. Retrieved from http://www.aabri.com/jcse.html

23. References • McFadyen, A. K., Webster, V., Strachan, K., Figgins, E., Brown, H., & McKechnie, J. (2005). The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale: A possible more stabel sub-scale model for the original version of RIPLS. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19, 595-603. doi: 10.1080/13561820500430157 • Reeves, S., Tassone, M., Parker, K., Wagner, S. J., & Simmons, B. (2012). Interprofessional education: An overview of key developments in the past three decades. Work, 41, 233- 245. doi: 10.3233/WOR-2012-1298 • Scanlon, L. (ed.). (2011). Becoming a professional: An interdisciplinary analysis of professional learning. New York, NY: Springer. • Williams, B., McCook, F., Brown, T., Palmero, C., McKenna, L., Boyle, M. …McCall, L. (2012). Are undergraduate health care students ‘ready’ for interprofessional learning? A cross- sectional attitudinal study. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 10. Retrieved from http://ijahsp.nova.edu • Zucchero, R. A., Hooker, E. A., Harland, B., Larkin, S., & Tunningley, J. (2011). Maximizing the impact of a symposium to facilitate change in student attitudes about interdisciplinary teamwork. Clinical Gerontologist, 34, 399-412. doi:10.1080/07317115.2011.588543