Fluent Essays

1 postsInterprofessional Collaboration Education The attached article discusses teaching nursing students how to “interprofessionally collaborate”. It is lengthy but a good read. My question to you is, how did your program prepare you for interprofessional collaboration? Did you feel prepared for it when you got to practice? What have you learned during your time as a nurse to improve your interprofessional collaboration?    Using 200-300 words APA format with at least two references. Sources must be published within the last 5 years. ORIGINAL ARTICLE Teaching and learning activities to educate nursing students for interprofessional collaboration: A scoping review Natalie L. Murdoch, Sheila Epp, and Jeanette Vinek School of Nursing, University of British Columbia—Okanagan Campus, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada ABSTRACT To prepare new graduates with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to engage in effective interprofes- sional collaboration (IPC) in practice, healthcare professional programmes need to ensure their curricu- lum provides opportunities for interprofessional education (IPE) and IPC. To strengthen IPE within an undergraduate curriculum and meet the professional requirements set out by regulatory bodies to prepare new graduate nurses to achieve IPC competencies, a curriculum initiative was developed to expand IPE across the four years of the Baccalaureate of Science in Nursing (BSN) programme. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify published teaching-learning activities in undergraduate nursing programmes to inform the development and integration of IPE curricula. The literature included was identified by searching the following electronic databases: EMBASE and EBSCO (CINAHL, Medline, Education Research Complete, ERIC). The search was limited to articles with abstracts published between 2008 and 2016 in the English language. All ten studies that met inclusion criteria reported students’ perceived interprofessional education as valuable in facilitating their achievement of IPC competencies. Interprofessional education is an approach for preparing nursing students with knowledge, skills, and attitudes to achieve IPC competencies and therefore, urgently needs to become more prevalent in nursing curricula. Educators can use a variety of IPE teaching-learning activities to support students’ achievement of IPC competencies in order to prepare new practitioners to engage in effective IPC in a variety of healthcare milieus. Nurse educators are encouraged to intentionally integrate learning opportunities into current and future undergraduate nursing education to prepare collaborative ready graduate nurses. ARTICLE HISTORY Received 11 June 2016 Revised 6 June 2017 Accepted 14 July 2017 KEY WORDS Interprofessional collaboration; interprofessional education; nursing students; pre- qualifying/pre-licensure; professional competence; scoping review Introduction To prepare new graduates with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to engage in effective interprofessional collaboration in practice, healthcare professional programmes need to ensure curriculum provides opportunities for interprofessional educa- tion (IPE) and collaboration. The Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC) defines interprofessional colla- boration as “a partnership between a team of health providers and a client in a participatory, collaborative, and coordinated approach to shared decision-making around health and social issues” (CIHC, 2010, p. 28). The CIHC (2010) definition of IPE was used to inform this work. Educators can use IPE teaching- learning activities to support students’ achievement of inter- professional collaborative (IPC) competencies in order to pre- pare new practitioners to engage in effective interprofessional collaboration in a variety of healthcare milieus (Abu-Rish et al., 2012; Bilodeau et al., 2010; D’Amour, Ferrada-Videla, San Martin Rodriguez, & Beaulieu, 2005; Fortugno, Chandra, Espin, & Gucciardi, 2013; Reeves et al., 2016). To strengthen IPE within curriculum, and meet profes- sional requirements set out by national and provincial regu- latory bodies to prepare new graduate nurses to achieve IPC competencies, a curriculum initiative was developed to expand IPE across the four years of a Baccalaureate of Science in Nursing (BSN) programme at a university in Western Canada. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify published IPE teaching-learning activities in under- graduate nursing programmes to inform the development and integration of IPE curricula. The findings from this review will be discussed in relation to informing curriculum devel- opment to facilitate students’ achievement of interprofessional collaborative (IPC) competencies to effectively engage in interprofessional collaborative practice upon graduation. Background IPE within healthcare professional programmes has been of interest internationally for some time and continues to be an expectation within curriculum (Institute of Medicine (IOM), 2015; Lapkin, Levett-Jones, & Gilligan, 2013; Szasz, 1969). However, it was not until the 1990’s that the first IPE course was offered at a university in Canada (Charles, Bainbridge, & Gilbert 2010). The World Health Organisation (WHO) advo- cates for healthcare professional students to engage in IPE to facilitate and support meeting IPC competencies (WHO, 2010). The Canadian nursing literature demonstrates weak analysis of CONTACT Natalie L. Murdoch [email protected] School of Nursing, University of British Columbia—Okanagan Campus, 1147 Research Rd - ARTS Building 140, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada. Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/ijic JOURNAL OF INTERPROFESSIONAL CARE 2017, VOL. 31, NO. 6, 744–753 https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1356807 © 2017 Taylor & Francis http://www.tandfonline.com/ijic https://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/13561820.2017.1356807&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-10-05 the role and impact IPE plays in nursing education (Grant et al., 2016; Reeves, 2016). Today, only 16 of the 91 universities/col- leges in Canada offering nursing programmes have a documen- ted, structured IPE component (Canadian Association of Schools of Nursing, 2013). Outcome or competency focused curricula have gained popularity as one method of implementing IPE (Barr, Koppel, Reeves, Hammick, & Freeth, 2005). Critics of competency- based education contend that competency does not equate with competence (Talbot, 2004; Reeves, 2012). However, com- petency–based interprofessional frameworks can support edu- cators with facilitating student achievement of mindfully chosen and contextualized interprofessional competencies. (Thistlethwaite et al., 2014). In addition, competency-based frameworks support learners to understand the learning process and differentiate matters of importance, while applying and integrating concepts in their learning journey (CIHC, 2010). Currently, educators can choose from one of four published interprofessional competency frameworks to inform the devel- opment of IPE in their curricula (Thistlethwaite et al., 2014). The CIHC’s (2010) A National Interprofessional Competency Framework was developed nationally and recognized across Canada as a useful tool to inform curriculum development. The framework identifies six competency domains which are applicable to students in a variety of practice settings: interpro- fessional communication, patient/client/family/community centred care, role identification, team functioning, collaborative leadership, and interprofessional conflict resolution (CIHC, 2010). The oldest of the other three published frameworks is The Interprofessional Capability Framework, published in the United Kingdom (Walsh, Gordon, Marshall, Wilson, & Hunt, 2005), which includes four competency domains. The Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice frame- work published in the United States (Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel, 2011) includes four core competency domains and was developed by a process informed by Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC) (2010) and the Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice (WHO, 2010). Lastly, the Interprofessional Capability Framework, devel- oped in Australia (Brewer & Jones, 2013) was built on the interprofessional frameworks from the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States and includes five competency domains. CIHC’s (2010) framework was used to inform this review. The CIHC (2010) framework offers an easy to follow approach to guide both teachers and students as they engage in learning to achieve interprofessional competencies. In addition, the Canadian context is reflected in CIHC’s framework. Methods Arksey and O’Malley’s (2007) scoping review framework was the methodology chosen to achieve the project’s goal. A scoping review is a rigorous and transparent approach used to identify evidence pertaining to a broader topic resulting in the identification and summarisation of key concepts. It is a process used to identify all relevant literature regardless of study design. The five steps of a scoping review include: identifying the research question, identifying relevant studies, study selection, charting the data and collating, and summar- ising and reporting the results (Arksey & O’Malley, 2007). This review was limited to studies that included BSN students, as the goal of this review was to inform curriculum develop- ment for a four-year BSN programme. Searching and screening processes To identify relevant literature for inclusion in this review, the following electronic databases were searched: EMBASE and EBSCO (CINAHL, Medline, Education Research Complete, ERIC). To identify current teaching-learning approaches to IPE utilised by educators, the search was limited to articles with abstracts published between 2008 and October 2016 in the English language. This time frame was chosen as it followed the introduction of the CIHC in 2006, and the inflow of funding from Health Canada directed towards interprofessional initiatives (CIHC, 2010). The search terms included: interpro- fession* or interdisciplin* or multidisciplin* and nurs* and education and student. The search yielded 276 articles. Primary screening of the articles included reviewing the titles and abstracts to identify whether the abstract, introduc- tion, and/or author information contained Canadian content. The screening resulted in the identification of 46 articles with the potential to be included in the review. The articles were then read in their entirety and reviewed against the predeter- mined inclusion criteria: primary studies; Canadian context; interprofessional education; undergraduate education; and pre-licensure BSN students. Of those 46 articles, 36 were excluded for the following reasons: were discussion or theoretical papers, lacked a dis- tinct focus on IPE, or did not focus on undergraduate stu- dents, resulting in 10 studies accepted for the review (Figure 1). Analysis The teaching-learning activities of the included papers were reviewed for their ability to facilitate students’ achievement of the six competency domains outlined in CIHC (2010) and for potential integration in various years of a BSN programme. The impact of the teaching-learning activity was assessed using the modified Kirkpatrick Model of Educational Outcomes for Interprofessional Education (Freeth, Hammick, Reeves, Koppel, & Barr, 2005). (Table 1). Each of the IPE teaching-learning activities in the included papers were categorised using the Educating Nurses for Interprofessional Practice (ENIPP) Pathway. The ENIPP pathway is a modified version of McMaster University’s Description of Interprofessional Education Activities and Competencies (McMaster University, 2007). The ENIPP Pathway depicts a scaffolding framework that can be used by educators to guide the most appropriate placement of IPE teaching-learning activities throughout a four-year degree. The pathway includes three levels of stu- dent education related to interprofessional practice, where each level builds on the previous. The pathway’s three levels begin with “exposure”. At the exposure level, students take JOURNAL OF INTERPROFESSIONAL CARE 745 an observational role to gain awareness of the roles, respon- sibilities, and relationships of other healthcare providers. The second level is “experience”, where students participate in interprofessional practice. The third and final level is “engagement”; at this level, students utilise interprofessional practice knowledge and skills to actively engage in and contribute, as members of interprofessional teams. Results This scoping review aimed to identify published teaching- learning activities in undergraduate nursing programmes to inform the development and integration of IPE curricula. The 10 studies included in this review comprised evaluations of a variety of IPE teaching-learning activities and reported stu- dents perceived IPE as valuable in facilitating achievement of IPC competencies. (Table 2). Interprofessional competencies All of the studies included in this review reported learning objec- tives that were related to the development of interprofessional collaborative competencies. None of the studies reported the use of an interprofessional competency framework as a foundation to the development of the curriculum and/or teaching-learning activities. However, all of the studies measured student percep- tions of achieving one or more IPC competencies. The primary focus was most frequently on interprofessional collaboration and team functioning (Bilidoeau et al., 2010; Dobson et al., 2009; Fortugno et al., 2013; Meffe, Moravac, & Espin, 2012; Racine, Proctor, & Jewell, 2012; Takahashi, Brissette, & Thorstad, 2010). Four studies focused on attitude and knowledge development in relation to role identification of interprofessional team members (Atack, Parker, Rocchi, Maher, & Dryden, 2009; Basran et al., 2014; Meffe et al., 2012; Mohaupt et al., 2012), with three studies focusing further on knowledge development of the roles of the interprofessional team (Dobson et al., 2009; Lait, Suter, Arthur, & Deutschlander, 2011; Takahashi et al., 2010). Timing of IPE teaching and learning activities The majority (n = 8) of studies included upper level nursing students and students from all levels of other healthcare professional programmes. Two of the studies did not report the education level of students participating (Bilodeau et al., 2010; Takahashi et al., 2010). Setting The IPE activities took place in a variety of settings. The majority of studies (n = 7) took place in the practice environ- ment in either an acute care or community setting, such as a rural inpatient rehabilitation unit, rural and tertiary acute care units, and a pediatric outpatient clinic. Other settings used for the remaining three studies included: a simulation lab, a secondary school, and an undergraduate classroom (Table 2). Type of IPE teaching-learning activity Each of the teaching-learning activities included in the studies comprised a preparatory element followed by an experiential element. A variety of teaching-learning activities provided the opportunity for IPE and collaboration with other healthcare pro- viders. Nursing students either learned side-by-side with other healthcare professional students, or were immersed in real-world practice with healthcare providers (Basran et al., 2014; Fortugno et al., 2013; Meffe et al., 2012; Racine et al., 2012; Takahashi et al., 2010). In four studies, nursing students experienced interprofes- sional collaboration through high-fidelity simulation, case studies, and small group discussion (Atack et al., 2009; Bilodeau et al., 2010; Dobson et al., 2009; Mohaupt et al., 2012). All interprofes- sional teaching-learning activities in the included studies had an interactive element (Table 3). Electronic Database Search (n=314) EMBASE (n=67) EBSCO (CINAHL, Medline, Education Research Complete, ERIC) (n=247) Papers moved forward after primary screening (n=27) Primary screening Papers Excluded (n=287) Final papers included in Review (n=10) Secondary Screening Papers Excluded (n=17) Figure 1. Overview of the literature search and article selection. Table 1. Modified Kirkpatrick’s Model of Educational Outcomes for Interprofessional Education. Criteria Description of Criteria Level 1: Reaction Learners’ views on the learning experience and its interprofessional nature. Level 2a: Modification of perceptions & attitudes Changes in reciprocal attitudes or perceptions between participant groups. Changes in perception or attitude towards the value and/or use of team approaches to caring for a specific client group. Level 2b: Acquisition of knowledge & skills Including knowledge and skills linked to interprofessional collaboration. Level 3: Behavioural change Identifies individuals’ transfer of interprofessional learning to their practice setting and their changed professional practice. Level 4a: Change in organisational practice Wider changes in the organisation and delivery of care. Level 4b: Benefits to patients/clients Improvements in health or well-being of patients/clients. 746 N. L. MURDOCH ET AL. Ta b le 2. C h ar ac te ri st ic s of in cl ud ed st ud ie s. A ut h or / Ye ar A im of St ud y D es ig n Sa m p le IP E te ac h in g -l ea rn in g ac ti vi ti es O ut co m e m ea su re m en t to ol s M ai n fin d in g s re la te d to IP E A ta ck et al . (2 00 9) To ex am in e ch an g e in d is as te r m an ag em en t co m p et en cy an d in te rp ro fe ss io n al at ti tu d es af te r st ud en ts co m p le te d th e on lin e co ur se an d si m ul at io n . D es ig n : Pr e- /p os t- te st ev al ua ti on Sa m p le : 3r d ye ar n ur si n g st ud en ts (n = 6) 2n d ye ar p ar am ed ic in e st ud en ts (n = 8) 2n d ye ar so ci al se rv ic e w or ke r st ud en ts (n = 13 ) 2n d ye ar p h ar m ac y te ch n ic ia n st ud en ts (n = 2) 3r d ye ar m ed ic in e st ud en t (n = 1) re sp ir at or y th er ap is t st ud en t (n = 1) 2n d ye ar p ol ic e st ud en t (n = 1) 1s t ye ar m ed ic al ra d ia ti on st ud en t (n = 1) O n lin e in te rp ro fe ss io n al co ur se in d is as te r m an ag em en t an d em er g en cy p re p ar ed n es s si m ul at io n Q u an ti ta ti ve : Re se ar ch er ad ap te d Li ke rt sc al e su rv ey b as ed on Ry an ,C am p b el la n d Br ig h am (1 99 9) . Re se ar ch er ad ap te d Re ad in es s fo r In te rp ro fe ss io n al Le ar n in g Sc al e (R IP LS ), Pa rs el l & Bl ig h (1 99 9) O p en -e n d ed q u es ti o n s: Re se ar ch er d ev el op ed op en -e n d ed q ue st io n su rv ey b as ed on Ry an , C am p b el l an d Br ig h am (1 99 9) Q u an ti ta ti ve : O ve ra ll re su lt s w er e st at is ti ca lly si g n ifi ca n t (p = 0. 00 9) . St at is ti ca lly si g n ifi ca n t im p ro ve m en t (p va lu es n ot p ro vi d ed ) in su b sc al es : te am w or k an d co lla b or at io n an d p ro fe ss io n al re sp on si b ili ty . O p en -e n d ed q u es ti o n s: Fo ur m aj or su b -t h em es w er e id en ti fie d : 1. Im p ro ve d re ad in es s fo r p ra ct ic e d ur in g a d is as te r; 2. A w ak en in g to in te rp ro fe ss io n al p ra ct ic e; 3. In si g h t in to th e cl ie n t p er sp ec ti ve ; 4. D ev el op m en t of n ew in te n ti on s, n ew ac ti vi ti es Ba sr an , et al . (2 01 4) D es cr ib e th e ev al ua ti on of th e U n iv er si ty of Sa sk at ch ew an ’s Lo n g it ud in al El d er ly Pe rs on Sh ad ow in g (L EP S) p ro je ct , an in te rp ro fe ss io n al se n io r m en to ri n g p ro g ra m m e in te n d ed to im p ro ve h ea lt h sc ie n ce st ud en ts ’ at ti tu d es to w ar d ol d er ad ul ts an d ot h er h ea lt h ca re p ro vi d er s. D es ig n : Pr e- /p os t- te st ev al ua ti on Sa m p le : 3r d ye ar n ur si n g st ud en ts (n = 22 ) 1s t ye ar m ed ic in e st ud en ts (n = 30 ) 1s t ye ar p h ar m ac y st ud en ts (n = 12 ) 1s t ye ar p h ys io th er ap y st ud en ts (n = 46 ) 2n d ye ar n ut ri ti on st ud en ts (n = 20 ) 4t h ye ar so ci al w or k p ar tn er w it h co m m un it y- d w el lin g ol d er ad ul ts (n = n ot p ro vi d ed ) Se n io r M en to rs h ip Pr og ra m m e – Lo n g it ud in al El d er ly Pe rs on Sh ad ow in g Pr og ra m m e Q u an ti ta ti ve : In te rp ro fe ss io n al Ed uc at io n Pe rc ep ti on Sc al e (IE PS ) su rv ey (L ue ch t, M ad es en , Ta ug h er , & Pe tt er so n , 19 90 ) Q u al it at iv e: Fo cu s g ro up us in g re se ar ch er d ev el op ed in te rv ie w g ui d e Q u an ti ta ti ve : N o si g n ifi ca n t ch an g e on an y of th e IE PS su b sc al es . 85 – 96 % st ud en ts re p or te d h ig h le ve ls of sa ti sf ac ti on w it h LE PS .S tu d en ts ag re ed th at p ar ti ci p at in g in LE PS im p ro ve d th ei r kn ow le d g e of g er ia tr ic s, in te rp ro fe ss io n al te am w or k, ro le s/ re sp on si b ili ti es of ot h er h ea lt h ca re p ro vi d er s. Q u al it at iv e: LE PS p ro g ra m m e h ad a si g n ifi ca n tl y p os it iv e im p ac t on st ud en ts ’a tt it ud es to w ar d ol d er ad ul ts . Bi lo d ea u et al . (2 01 0) . D es cr ib e p ar ti ci p an ts ’ p er ce p ti on s co n ce rn in g th ei r in vo lv em en t in an IP E an d th ei r kn ow le d g e of th e b en ef it s of In te rp ro fe ss io n al Ed uc at io n fo r C ol la b or at iv e Pa ti en t ce n tr ed Pr ac ti ce (IE C PC P) In it ia ti ve . D es ig n : Pr e- /p os t- te st ev al ua ti on Sa m p le : Re si d en ts / tr ai n ee s an d p ro fe ss io n al s fr om th e fo llo w in g p ro fe ss io n s: n ur si n g , p h ar m ac y, ki n es io lo g y, n ut ri ti on , oc cu p at io n al th er ap y, p sy ch ol og y, m ed ic in e, p h ys io th er ap y, co m m un it y h ea lt h p ro je ct d ir ec to rs (n = 4) ex ec ut iv e te am m em b er s (n = 6) *N ot e: sa m p le si ze is d iff er en t fo r ea ch co m p on en t of th e IE C PC P in it ia ti ve . *y ea r of st ud y n ot re p or te d D es ig n ed an d im p le m en te d an In te rp ro fe ss io n al Ed uc at io n fo r C ol la b or at iv e Pa ti en t ce n tr ed Pr ac ti ce (IE C PC P) In it ia ti ve (a s p ar t of st ud en t p re ce p to rs h ip ). Fo ur co m p on en ts of th e p ro g ra m m e in cl ud e: 1. In it ia lt ra in in g ;2 . Pr ac ti ca l tr ai n in g in p ri m ar y ca re ; 3. C on ti n ui n g Ed uc at io n ; 4. C om m un ic at io n an d in fo rm at io n te ch n ol og ie s in su p p or t of IP E Q u an ti ta ti ve : Re se ar ch er d ev el op ed se lf- ad m in is te re d q ue st io n n ai re s us in g 5 p oi n t Li ke rt -t yp e sc al e q ue st io n s Q u al it at iv e: Se m i- st ru ct ur ed in te rv ie w s us in g re se ar ch er d ev el op ed op en -e n d ed q ue st io n s Q u an ti ta ti ve : C o m p o n en t 1: St at is ti ca lly si g n ifi ca n t im p ro ve m en t in st ud en ts ’ p er ce p ti on s of th ei r kn ow le d g e of th e b en ef it s of IE C PC P b ef or e an d af te r IP E co ur se s (p < 0. 05 ). C o m p o n en t 2: St at is ti ca lly si g n ifi ca n t d iff er en ce in p er ce iv ed im p ro ve m en ts to kn ow le d g e of IP C PC P b en ef it s am on g re si d en ts /t ra in ee s. N o st at is ti ca lly si g n ifi ca n t d iff er en ce in p er ce iv ed im p ro ve m en ts to kn ow le d g e of IP C PC P b en ef it s am on g p ro fe ss io n al s. C o m p o n en t 3: 86 .1 % p al lia ti ve ca re te am p ar ti ci p an ts , 86 .5 % p ri va te p ra ct ic e se tt in g p ar ti ci p an ts , 78 .9 % h ea lt h an d so ci al se rv ic es ce n tr e p ar ti ci p an ts ag re ed th e le ar n in g ac ti vi ti es al lo w ed th em to le ar n w it h , fr om an d ab ou t ea ch ot h er . C o m p o n en t 4: N ot re p or te d Q u al it at iv e: N ot re p or te d (C o n ti n u ed ) JOURNAL OF INTERPROFESSIONAL CARE 747 Ta b le 2. (C on ti n ue d ). A ut h or / Ye ar A im of St ud y D es ig n Sa m p le IP E te ac h in g -l ea rn in g ac ti vi ti es O ut co m e m ea su re m en t to ol s M ai n fin d in g s re la te d to IP E D ob so n et al . (2 00 9) To d ev el op an d ev al ua te a cl as sr oo m - b as ed cu rr ic ul um d es ig n ed to p ro m ot e in te rp ro fe ss io n al co m p et en ci es am on g st ud en ts fr om va ri ou s h ea lt h p ro fe ss io n s to w or k to g et h er on sy st em - b as ed p ro b le m s us in g q ua lit y im p ro ve m en t m et h od s an d to ol s to im p ro ve p at ie n t- ce n tr ed ca re . D es ig n Pr e- /p os t- te st ev al ua ti on Sa m p le : 2n d an d 4t h ye ar n ur si n g st ud en ts (n = 85 ) 2n d ye ar n ut ri ti on st ud en ts (n = 26 ) 3r d ye ar p h ar m ac y st ud en ts (n = 82 ) 3r d ye ar p h ys ic al th er ap y st ud en ts (n = 30 ) Re se ar ch er d ev el op ed q ua lit y im p ro ve m en t ca se st ud y in vo lv in g el d er ly p at ie n ts in tr an si ti on fr om ac ut e ca re to co m m un it y ca re . Q u an ti ta ti ve : 7- p oi n t Li ke rt -t yp e se lf- re fle ct io n to ol (C la rk ,1 99 4) an d M cM as te r U n iv er si ty d ev el op ed 7- p oi n t Li ke rt -t yp e q ue st io n n ai re (J ac q ue s, 20 00 ) O p en -e n d ed q u es ti o n s: O p ti on to in cl ud e fr ee te xt co m m en ts Q u an ti ta ti ve : Im p ro ve m en t b et w ee n p re -/ p os t- te st re fle ct io n sc or es fo r it em s ad d re ss in g st ud en ts ’ ab ili ty to co m m un ic at e an d co op er at e w it h ot h er s an d th ei r co m fo rt w it h an d ab ili ty to id en ti fy w it h th ei r te am (p < 0. 00 1) ; it em s ad d re ss in g te am co n fli ct , g ro up d ec is io n -m ak in g , an d ro le of ot h er p ro fe ss io n al s (p < 0. 01 ). Po st -t es t sc or es re fle ct ed a h ig h le ve l of sa ti sf ac ti on w it h th e ex p er ie n ce . N o si g n ifi ca n t d iff er en ce s in th e g ro up ev al ua ti on sc or es b as ed on p ro fe ss io n al d es ig n at io n . Fo rt ug n o et al . (2 01 3) To ex p lo re th e in te rp ro fe ss io n al te am w or k th at oc cu rr ed am on g th e un d er g ra d ua te st ud en ts p ar ti ci p at in g in an in te rp ro fe ss io n al p la ce m en t. D es ig n :D ur in g an d p os t- te st ev al ua ti on Sa m p le :3 rd an d 4t h ye ar st ud en ts fr om n ur si n g (n = 1) , ch ild an d yo ut h ca re t (n = 1) , ea rl y ch ild h oo d ed uc at io n (n = 1) n ut ri ti on (n = 1) se co n d ar y sc h oo l p re ce p to r (n = 2) Re se ar ch er d ev el op ed in te rp ro fe ss io n al p la ce m en t to d ev el op an d im p le m en t fo ur h ea lt h y- liv in g m od ul es fo r se co n d ar y sc h oo l st ud en ts Q u al it at iv e: Fo cu s g ro up us in g re se ar ch er d ev el op ed se m i- st ru ct ur ed to p ic g ui d e. Q u al it at iv e: Tw o m aj or th em es em er g ed : 1. Te am fu n ct io n in g ; 2. Sh ift in p er sp ec ti ve s. La it et al . (2 01 1) To in cr ea se in te rp ro fe ss io n al ca p ac it y in h ea lt h p ro vi d er s an d st ud en ts in cl in ic al si te s in a p ro vi n ce in w es te rn C an ad a. D es ig n : Po st -t es t ev al ua ti on Sa m p le : 4t h ye ar n ur si n g , p h ar m ac y, oc cu p at io n al th er ap y, p h ys io th er ap y, re sp ir at or y th er ap y, sp ee ch la n g ua g e p at h ol og y st ud en ts *T ot al st ud en t sa m p le (n = 11 ) p re ce p to rs (n = n ot re p or te d ) In te rp ro fe ss io n al m en to ri n g in a fin al p re ce p to rs h ip p ra ct ic e ex p er ie n ce Q u al it at iv e: Ex p lo ra to ry g ro up an d in d iv id ua l se m i- st ru ct ur ed in te rv ie w s us in g re se ar ch er d ev el op ed op en -e n d ed q ue st io n s. Q u al it at iv e: Th re e th em es em er g ed (t w o re la te d to IP E) : 1. Pr ov id er co m m it m en t; 2. C om p le xi ty of in te rp ro fe ss io n al m en to ri n g ac ti vi ti es ; 3. St ud en ts ’ le ar n in g ou tc om es . M ef fe et al . (2 01 2) Ev al ua te h ow p ar ti ci p at io n in an IP E p ilo t p ro g ra m m e in m at er n it y ca re m ay en h an ce st ud en t kn ow le d g e, sk ill s/ at ti tu d es , an d m ay p ro m ot e th ei r co lla b or at iv e b eh av io ur in th e p ra ct ic e se tt in g . D es ig n : Po st -t es t ev al ua ti on Sa m p le : se n io r st ud en ts fr om n ur si n g (n = 3) m id w ife ry (n = 3) m ed ic in e (n = 3) Si x w or ks h op m od ul es an d tw o cl in ic al sh ad ow in g ex p er ie n ce s Q u al it at iv e: Se m i- st ru ct ur ed in te rv ie w s us in g re se ar ch d ev el op ed op en -e n d ed q ue st io n s. Q u al it at iv e: Fo ur th em es em er g ed : 1. Th e p ro ce ss of re la ti on sh ip b ui ld in g ;2 . Th e p ro ce ss of es ta b lis h in g co n fid en t co m m un ic at io n ; 3. W ill in g n es s to co lla b or at e; 4. Pr ov id in g w om an / fa m ily -c en tr ed ca re . M oh au p t et al . (2 01 2) To ex am in e ch an g es in un d er g ra d ua te h ea lt h ca re st ud en ts ’ p er ce p ti on s an d at ti tu d es to w ar d in te rp ro fe ss io n al co lla b or at io n fo llo w in g th ei r p ar ti ci p at io n in an in te rp ro fe ss io n al si m ul at io n p ro g ra m m e D es ig n : Pr e- /p os t- te st ev al ua ti on Sa m p le : fin al ye ar st ud en ts fr om n ur si n g (n = 42 ) oc cu p at io n al th er ap y/ p h ys io th er ap y as si st an t (n = 15 ) p ar am ed ic (n …