Pei Se Wong1, Yu Sui Chen2, Pui San Saw3. 1. Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 2. Division of Human Biology, School of Medicine, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 3. School of Pharmacy, Monash University, Sunway, Malaysia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interprofessional education (IPE) is an instructional approach for equipping health professions students with essential competencies needed to provide collaborative patient-centred care. The implementation and sustainability of IPE are challenging for many institutions. This qualitative study identified barriers and facilitators in the processes of IPE implementation. METHODS: We conducted mixed focus groups (FGs) with faculty members from medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, nutrition and dietetics, nursing, chiropractic, Chinese medicine, and other health sciences programmes; who were involved in the planning of IPE at institutional or programme level, or who participated in IPE activity. Transcripts were analysed using grounded theory. RESULTS: We identified 25 barriers and facilitators, clustered under five major categories of commitment, faculty engagement, IPE design, support, and delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation of IPE may hinge on actions in 5 stages; commitment, faculty engagement, IPE design, support, and delivery. The processes will require consistent leadership to break down professional silos and enhance collaborative effort in IPE implementation.
BACKGROUND: Interprofessional education (IPE) is an instructional approach for equipping health professions students with essential competencies needed to provide collaborative patient-centred care. The implementation and sustainability of IPE are challenging for many institutions. This qualitative study identified barriers and facilitators in the processes of IPE implementation. METHODS: We conducted mixed focus groups (FGs) with faculty members from medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, nutrition and dietetics, nursing, chiropractic, Chinese medicine, and other health sciences programmes; who were involved in the planning of IPE at institutional or programme level, or who participated in IPE activity. Transcripts were analysed using grounded theory. RESULTS: We identified 25 barriers and facilitators, clustered under five major categories of commitment, faculty engagement, IPE design, support, and delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation of IPE may hinge on actions in 5 stages; commitment, faculty engagement, IPE design, support, and delivery. The processes will require consistent leadership to break down professional silos and enhance collaborative effort in IPE implementation.
Authors: Alison S Clay; Erin R Leiman; Brent Jason Theiling; Yao Song; Blanca Blanca Iris Padilla; Nicholas M Hudak; Ann Michelle Hartman; Jeffrey M Hoder; Kathleen A Waite; Hui-Jie Lee; Edward G Buckley Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Hend E Abdelhakim; Louise Brown; Lizzie Mills; Anika Ahmad; James Hammell; Douglas G J McKechnie; Tin Wai Terry Ng; Rebecca Lever; Cate Whittlesea; Joe Rosenthal; Mine Orlu Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-08-10 Impact factor: 3.263