Audrey J Brooks1, Mei-Kuang Chen2, Elizabeth Goldblatt3, Maryanna Klatt4, Benjamin Kligler5, Mary S Koithan6, Mary Jo Kreitzer7, Jeannie K Lee8, Ana Marie Lopez9, Victoria Maizes10, Irene Sandvold11, Douglas Taren12, Patricia Lebensohn13. 1. Andrew Weil Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Arizona, PO Box 245153, Tucson, AZ, 85724-5153, United States. Electronic address: brooksaj@email.arizona.edu. 2. Andrew Weil Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Arizona, PO Box 245153, Tucson, AZ, 85724-5153, United States. 3. Academic Collaborative of Integrative Health, 700 S Flower St., Ste 1000, Los Angeles, CA, 90017, United States; American College of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 455 Arkansas St, San Francisco, CA, 94107, United States. 4. Department of Family Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, 2231 N High St., Ste 261, Columbus, OH, 43201, United States. 5. Department of Family Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave L. Levy Place, New York, NY, 10029-5674, United States. 6. College of Nursing, University of Arizona, PO Box 210203, Tucson, AZ, 85721-0203, United States. 7. Earl E. Bakken Center for Spirituality & Healing, School of Nursing, University of Minnesota, C510 Mayo Memorial Building, MMC 505, 420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, United States. 8. Pharmacy Practice & Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, PO Box 210202, Tucson, AZ, 85721-0202, United States. 9. School of Medicine, University of Utah, HSEB 5515, 26 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, United States. 10. Andrew Weil Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Arizona, PO Box 245153, Tucson, AZ, 85724-5153, United States; Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Arizona, 655 N Alvernon Way, Ste 228, Tucson, AZ, 85711, United States; Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, PO Box 245163, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 85724-5163, United States. 11. Medical Training and Geriatrics Branch, Division of Medicine and Dentistry, Bureau of Health Workforce, Health Resources and Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rm 15 N 152, Rockville, MD, 20857, United States. 12. Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, PO Box 245163, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 85724-5163, United States. 13. Andrew Weil Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Arizona, PO Box 245153, Tucson, AZ, 85724-5153, United States; Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Arizona, 655 N Alvernon Way, Ste 228, Tucson, AZ, 85711, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although there is mounting clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence supporting integrative healthcare (IH), a significant knowledge gap hinders widespread adoption by primary care professionals. INTERVENTION: Based on IH competencies developed by an interprofessional team and a needs assessment, a 32-h online interprofessional IH course, Foundations in Integrative Health, was developed. Trainees learn to conduct an IH assessment and how patients are assessed and treated from the diverse professions in integrative primary care. METHODS: The course was pilot-tested with educational program trainees, faculty and clinical staff at graduate level primary care training programs (primary care residencies, nursing, pharmacy, public health, behavioral health, and licensed complementary and IH programs). OUTCOME MEASURES: Prior to and following the course, participants completed an IH knowledge test, an IH efficacy self-assessment, and validated measures of IH attitudes, interprofessional learning, provider empathy, patient involvement, resiliency, self-care, wellness behaviors, and wellbeing. Evaluation surveys were administered following each unit and the course. RESULTS: Almost one-half (n = 461/982, 47%) completed the course. Pre/post course improvements in IH knowledge, IH self-efficacy, IH attitudes, interprofessional learning, provider empathy, resiliency, self-care, several wellness behaviors, and wellbeing were observed. The course was positively evaluated with most (93%) indicating interest in applying IH principles and that the course enhanced their educational experience (92%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of a multi-site, online curriculum for introducing IH to a diverse group of primary care professionals. Primary care training programs have the ability to offer an interprofessional, IH curriculum with limited on-site faculty expertise.
BACKGROUND: Although there is mounting clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence supporting integrative healthcare (IH), a significant knowledge gap hinders widespread adoption by primary care professionals. INTERVENTION: Based on IH competencies developed by an interprofessional team and a needs assessment, a 32-h online interprofessional IH course, Foundations in Integrative Health, was developed. Trainees learn to conduct an IH assessment and how patients are assessed and treated from the diverse professions in integrative primary care. METHODS: The course was pilot-tested with educational program trainees, faculty and clinical staff at graduate level primary care training programs (primary care residencies, nursing, pharmacy, public health, behavioral health, and licensed complementary and IH programs). OUTCOME MEASURES: Prior to and following the course, participants completed an IH knowledge test, an IH efficacy self-assessment, and validated measures of IH attitudes, interprofessional learning, provider empathy, patient involvement, resiliency, self-care, wellness behaviors, and wellbeing. Evaluation surveys were administered following each unit and the course. RESULTS: Almost one-half (n = 461/982, 47%) completed the course. Pre/post course improvements in IH knowledge, IH self-efficacy, IH attitudes, interprofessional learning, provider empathy, resiliency, self-care, several wellness behaviors, and wellbeing were observed. The course was positively evaluated with most (93%) indicating interest in applying IH principles and that the course enhanced their educational experience (92%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of a multi-site, online curriculum for introducing IH to a diverse group of primary care professionals. Primary care training programs have the ability to offer an interprofessional, IH curriculum with limited on-site faculty expertise.