Preparation for becoming members of health care teams: findings from a 5-year evaluation of a student interprofessional training ward

An interesting article by:  Staffan Pelling, Anders Kalen, Mats Hammar and Ola Wahlström.

Setting: An orthopaedic interprofessional training ward manned by students at a University Hospital.
Objective: To assess to what extent students from different undergraduate programmes evaluated the effects of a 2-week rotation at the ward on their professional roles and the value of teamwork within health care.
Method: A questionnaire was filled in by 841 students by the end of a 2-week rotation at the ward over 5 years. Questions concerned students’ estimate of how the rotation had strengthened their insight into their own future professional role, into other students’ professional roles and into the value of teamwork within health care. Differences between the different student categories and possible associations between the different estimates were statistically analysed.
Results: Students from all programmes reported that the rotation at the student ward had dramatically strengthened their insight about their own future professional role as well as the roles of the other professions and the value of teamwork within health care.
Conclusion: Health care is a complicated system based on cooperation and professionalism. We suggest that interprofessional training of students from all professions within health care should be a part of their education as a worthwhile preparation for their future professional work and to ensure high-quality health care.

To read more, see the Journal of Interprofessional Care, September 2011, Vol. 25, No. 5 , Pages 328-332.

Interprofessional professionalism: Linking professionalism and interprofessional care

Professionalism has typically been defined as a set of non-cognitive characteristics (such as empathy) or as a set of humanistic values and behaviors through which clinicians express a commitment to excellence and compassion (Stern, 2006). Its importance is underscored by the widespread adoption of language and policies by associations, accreditors, and regulatory agencies across the health professions that require clinicians to be trained and assessed on professionalism (Greiner & Knebel, 2003). Yet, a critical conceptual gap remains in defining how professionalism contributes to improved patient outcomes, especially in the context of interprofessional care environments.

Elucidation of the link between professionalism and interprofessional care is an important issue to examine. Although contemporary clinicians do not practice in social isolation, development of the professionalism concept has neglected its link to collaborative care. In the contemporary context, professionalism contributes to safe, high-quality care primarily by supporting and fostering effective interprofessional care (Gilbert, Yan, & Hoffman, 2010). We believe that persistent disciplinary insularity in health professions education has prevented this connection from being adequately emphasized.

In 2006, representatives of seven American national professional and educational groups convened to explore the concept of professionalism that could transcend and bridge the health-care professions. The group’s initial motivation was to identify or develop public-domain educational and assessment tools to promote professionalism. The group quickly recognized that there were many parallel, overlapping efforts to support professionalism within professions, but that little work had been done to develop a shared professionalism framework across professions. By 2009, the group expanded to 11 organizations representing 10 doctoral health professions: optometry, dentistry, psychology, veterinary medicine, pharmacy, physical therapy, audiology, nursing, and allopathic and osteopathic medicine. Currently, this group is called the Interprofessional Professionalism Collaborative (IPC).

The IPC began to focus on defining interprofessional professionalism and identifying its behavioral components. Though the group was kept small to foster interaction, collaboration, and consensus-building, an effort was made to include a broad range of health professions to ensure the generality of the resulting model. It was expected that there would be opportunities for feedback and contributions from other professions through presentations, discussions, surveys, and publications.

M.C. Holtman, J.S. Frost, D.P Hammer, K. McGuinn, & L.M. Nunez

For more information, see: Journal of Interprofessional Care, Sept 2011, Vol. 25 (5). P 383-5.

Using the Sociological Imagination in the Interprofessional Field

The interprofessional education and practice literature has continued to expand at an impressive rate over the past few decades. While it is encouraging to see an expansion of conceptual, evaluative and theoretical papers, there remains a tendency in the field to focus on psychological, social-psychological, organizational and systems perspectives. As a result of using this particular set of social science perspectives we have an increasingly firm grasp of how individuals may act, teams/groups may function and organisations/systems may operate within different interprofessional contexts. However, the explanations generated from these perspectives overlook wider social factors which form an important pillar upon which interprofessional relations and interactions rest.

In his seminal text, Mills (1967) maintained that sociology had an important role to play in understanding the social influences that affect their lives of people in different societies. He argued that as “neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both” we need to develop a way of exploring the links between individuals and the societies in which they live and interact. Mills termed this particular approach as the ‘sociological imagination’, which he argued could help to connect the individuals’ “experience and the wider society.”

The sociological imagination can be used as a way of viewing the world in social terms, specifically, how social phenomena may interact and influence each other. Importantly, it can help to understand how social context(s) may affect the individuals’ actions and interactions. Through its use, therefore, one could begin to see how the things individuals do are shaped by the social context they are situated within, the values they hold, and their interactions with others. For Mills, the use of the sociological imagination was most advantageous as it could help to understand social patterns and influences related to individuals and their personal (and collective) desires, fears, wants and concerns.

While Mills’ modernist standpoint of using sociology to connect individual (agency-based) and social (structurally-based) factors have lost favour following the rise in popularity of postmodern approaches, its aim on exploring people within their differing social contexts is nevertheless still a helpful analytical tool to use in thinking more about the influence of wider societal factors and processes, and how they can affect interprofessional interactions. It can also provide (a much needed) contrast to ways of thinking about interprofessional issues in a field which continues to focus on individual, team/group, and/or organizational/systems analyses.

Scott Reeves (Editor-in-Chief)

 For more information, read: Journal of Interprofessional Care, September 2011, Vol. 25 (5).

Improving interprofessional practice for vulnerable older people: gaining a better understanding of vulnerability

Interesting article written by: Clare Abley, John Bond, & Louise Robinson


A key focus for professionals working with older people in the community is on those who are vulnerable, although this vulnerability is not well defined. This study sought the views of health and social care professionals and older people on vulnerability, identifying significant differences between professional and older people’’s perspectives. It found that for older people, vulnerability is an emotional response to being in a specific situation, whereas for professionals, the vulnerability of those on their case loads relates to them having certain or a combination of characteristics (physical, psychological and social). The paper concludes that interprofessional care for older people in the community could be improved firstly by asking older people if they ever feel vulnerable and if so, in what situations and secondly by focusing team efforts on addressing the issues raised by older people in response to these questions.


For more information, see: Journal of Interprofessional Care, 
Improving interprofessional practice for vulnerable older people: gaining a better understanding of vulnerability, (September 2011), 25 (5), pg. 359-365.

Translating collaborative knowledge into practice: Findings from a 6-month follow-up study

Interprofessional education and collaboration in health and social care have become significant items on Canada's policy agenda. As a result, they are receiving attention from different levels of government, health services/academic institutions and regulatory bodies (e.g. Cote, Lauzon, & Kyd-Strickland, 2008). To date, however, only a limited number of studies have focused on the longer-term effects interprofessional education can have on individuals' collaborative practices (Barr, Koppel, Reeves, Hammick, & Freeth, 2005). This article provides a report on the findings from a 12-week graduate level course, which aimed to improve participants' knowledge in a range of interprofessional issues (e.g. nature of professional friction) as well as expose learners to key research studies and theories related to this field.

This interprofessional graduate elective course was situated in the masters of nursing program at a university based in Canada. Twenty students were enrolled in the course. They represented two professional groups – nursing and nutrition. Teaching approaches included interactive classroom lectures, student-led and self-directed learning. The course focused on exploring a range of issues relevant to interprofessional education and collaboration, which were discussed by use of the associated empirical and theoretical literature.

Ilona Alex Abramovich (Social Media Administrator)

Read more: Journal of Interprofessional Care, May 2011, Vol. 25 (2): 226-227.

Ilona Alex Abramovich, Sherry Espin, Abigail Wickson-Griffiths, Dale Dematteo, Lindsay Baker, Eileen Egan-Lee, Scott Reeves.

A grounded theory of interprofessional co-learning with residents of a homeless shelter

Great article written by Gayle E. Rutherford:

Clients, patients, families, and communities must be conceived

as partners in care delivery, not just as recipients (D’Amour, D. & Oandasan, I. (2005). Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(Suppl.), 8–20). Health-care students need an opportunity to understand community member self-determination, partnership, and empowerment (Scheyett, A., & Diehl, M. (2004). Social Work Education, 23(4), 435-450), within the frame of interprofessional education (IPE) where community members are involved as teachers and learners. The aim of this grounded theory research was to determine the conditions that support health-care students to learn with, from, and about community members. This study took place in a shelter for the homeless where nursing and social work students learned interprofessionally along with residents and clients of the shelter. Data were gathered through 7 months of participant observation, interviews, and focus groups. The interprofessional co-learning theory that emerged introduces the three phases of entering, engaging, and emerging, which co-learners experienced at different levels of intensity. This article outlines the conditions that support each of these phases of the co-learning process. This interprofessional co-learning theory provides a basis for further development and evaluation of IPE programs that strive to actively include community members as teachers and learners, experts, and novices together with service providers, students, and faculty members.

For more information read: Journal of Interprofessional Care (September 2011), 25 (5), pg. 352-358, Gayle E. Rutherford.

Interprofessional primary care protocols: A strategy to promote an evidence-based approach to teamwork and the delivery of care

Primary care reform involving interprofessional team-based care is a global phenomenon. In Ontario, Canada, 150 Family Health Teams (FHTs) have been approved in the past few years. The transition to a FHT is complex involving many changes and the processes for collaborative teamwork are not clearly delineated. To support the transition to team-based care in FHTs, a project was undertaken to develop and implement a series of interprofessional protocols in four clinical areas. These interprofessional protocols would contain relevant and evidence-based resources to support both a team and evidence-based approach to care. This paper reports on a qualitative study to examine the process of interprofessional protocol development and pilot implementation. Adopting an exploratory case study approach (Robson, 2002), 36 interviews were conducted with health professionals and community group members who participated in the creation and piloting of the protocols, and with project managers. In addition, observational and documentary data were gathered on the protocol development and implementation processes. The findings from the protocol development stage demonstrate the value of the focus on evidence and team, the process of assessing and targeting FHT needs, inter-organizational and interprofessional sharing, the importance of facilitation and support, and expectations for implementation. The findings from the pilot implementation stage report on the importance of champions and leaders, the implementation strategies used, FHT and organizational factors affecting implementation, and outcomes achieved. Findings are discussed in relation to the knowledge translation and interprofessional literature. Research is ongoing to examine the effectiveness of dissemination of the protocols to FHTs across the province of Ontario and its impact on health care outcomes.

Scott Reeves (Editor-in-Chief)

For more information read: Journal of Interprofessional Care (November 2010), 24 (6), pg. 653-665.