Simulated interprofessional education: An analysis of teaching and learning processes

Interesting article written by: Mary van Soeren; Sandra Devlin-Cop; Kathleen MacMillan; Lindsay Baker; Eileen Egan-Lee; and Scott Reeves.  

Simulated learning activities are increasingly being used in health professions and interprofessional education (IPE). Specifically, IPE programs are frequently adopting role-play simulations as a key learning approach. Despite this widespread adoption, there is little empirical evidence exploring the teaching and learning processes embedded within this type of simulation. This exploratory study provides insight into the nature of these processes through the use of qualitative methods. A total of 152 clinicians, 101 students and 9 facilitators representing a range of health professions, participated in video-recorded role-plays and debrief sessions. Videotapes were analyzed to explore emerging issues and themes related to teaching and learning processes related to this type of interprofessional simulated learning experience. In addition, three focus groups were conducted with a subset of participants to explore perceptions of their educational experiences. Five key themes emerged from the data analysis: enthusiasm and motivation, professional role assignment, scenario realism, facilitator style and background and team facilitation. Our findings suggest that program developers need to be mindful of these five themes when using role-plays in an interprofessional context and point to the importance of deliberate and skilled facilitation in meeting desired learning outcomes.

For more information, please read: Journal of Interprofessional Care (November 2011), 25 (6), pg. 434-440.

Interprofessional jargon: How is it exclusionary? Cultural determinants of language use in health care practice

Interesting article written by: Carrie Marshall, Jennifer Medves, Debbie Docherty, Margo Paterson (Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada)

Language can impact significantly on the ways in which health care professionals relate and provide clinical services, as well as the way in which patients conceptualize their role in the healthcare encounter. The aim of this project was to explore the barriers and challenges to developing a collaborative approach in health care. A hermeneutic research approach was used with a convenience sample of international key informants representing 6 disciplines. A total of 10 individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted. Findings emphasized the need to be more inclusive by avoiding the use of exclusionary jargon so that all members of the health care team, including patients and families, can adopt a collaborative practice orientation.

For more information, please see: Journal of Interprofessional Care, November 2011, Vol. 25, No. 6, Pages 452-453.

Knowing more about the other professions clarified my own profession

Interesting article written by Jakobsen, F., Hansen, T.B., & Erika, B. 

The purpose of this study was to compare which learning outcomes relating to an Interprofessional Training Unit (ITU) experience were found to be most important by students and by alumni. A cohort of 428 students in the ITU was asked to write three short statements describing the most important learning outcomes from the ITU. Alumni from the same cohort were after graduation asked the same question. Furthermore, they were asked to fill out a 12-item questionnaire. The statements concerning learning outcome were analysed qualitatively and categorized. The number of statements in each category was counted and tested for statistical difference between students and alumni. Students stated “uniprofessionalism” as the most important learning outcome followed by “interprofessionalism”, “professional identity” and “learning environment”. Alumni on the other hand stated “professional identity” as most important learning outcome followed with “interprofessionalism”, “learning environment” and “uniprofessionalism”. The study indicated that over time the perceived outcome of learning experiences from an ITU change in priority.

For more information, please see: Journal of Interprofessional Care, September 7, 2011: Early online: http://informahealthcare.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/doi/abs/10.3109/13561820.2011.595849

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.