Health Science Students’ Readiness for Interprofessional Education and Affecting Factors

Year 2021, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 51 - 57, 31.03.2021

Kevser Özata Şenay Sarmasoğlu Kılıkçıer

https://doi.org/10.31125/hunhemsire.906946

Cited By: 3

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study is to determine health sciences students’ readiness for interprofessional education and affecting factors.
Material and Methods: The design of this study is descriptive and comparative. The study sample consisted of 561 students from 11 departments [Nutrition and Dietetics, Child Development, Speech and Language Therapy, Dentistry, Pharmacy, Occupational Therapy, Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Nursing, Audiology, and Medicine (Turkish/English)] of a public university in Ankara. The data were collected with the Socio-demographic Questionnaire and the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale. Numbers, percentage, mean, median, t-test, Mann-Whitney U, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for data analyses.
Results: The students had a median (min.-max.) Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale score of 73.0 (30-95). Students’ readiness for interprofessional education significantly differed by department (p<0.01), mother's education level (p<0.01), willingness to take classes with students from other departments (p<0.01), and previous hospitalization (p=0.04).
Conclusion: Health science students’ readiness for interprofessional education was high. The readiness of students was affected by departments and some socio-demographic characteristics of students. Further qualitative and mixed-method research should be conducted to provide more in-depth insight into the reasons for these effects.

Keywords

Health care, interdisciplinary, interprofessional education, , multidisciplinary, student

Sağlık Bilimleri Alanında Eğitim Gören Öğrencilerin Mesleklerarası Eğitime Hazırbulunuşluklarının ve Etkileyen Faktörlerin Belirlenmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada sağlık bilimleri alanında eğitim gören öğrencilerin mesleklerarası öğrenmeye hazırbulunuşluklarını belirlemek ve hazırbulunuşluk düzeyleri üzerinde etkisi olabilecek değişkenleri incelemek amaçlanmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Araştırmanın deseni tanımlayıcı ve karşılaştırmalıdır. Araştırmaya Ankara’daki bir devlet üniversitesinin 11 bölümünde [Beslenme ve Diyetetik, Çocuk Gelişimi, Dil Konuşma Terapisi, Diş Hekimliği, Eczacılık, Ergoterapi, Fizyoterapi, Hemşirelik, Odyoloji, Tıp (Türkçe/ İngilizce)] eğitim gören 561 öğrenci katılmıştır. Çalışmaya katılan öğrencilerden veri toplamak için Sosyodemografik Özellikler Soru Formu ve Mesleklerarası Öğrenmeye Hazırbulunuşluk Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizlerinde sayı, ortalama, ortanca, t testi, Mann-Whitney U ve Kruskall-Wallis testleri kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Öğrencilerin Mesleklerarası Öğrenmeye Hazırbulunuşluk Ölçeği ortanca (min-max) değeri 73 (30-95) olarak bulunmuştur. Çalışmaya katılan öğrencilerin bölümlerine (p<0.01), anne eğitim düzeylerine (p<0.01), diğer bölümdeki öğrencilerle birlikte ders almaya isteklilik (p<0.01) ve daha önce hastanede yatma durumlarına (p=0.04) göre mesleklerarası öğrenmeye hazırbulunuşluk düzeyleri arasında anlamlı fark bulunmuştur.
Sonuç: Sağlık bilimleri alanında eğitim gören öğrencilerin mesleklerarası öğrenmeye hazırbulunuşluk düzeyleri yüksektir. Öğrencilerin hazır bulunuşlukları, bölümlerinden ve bazı sosyodemografik özelliklerinden etkilenmektedir. Bu faktörlerin altında yatan nedenlerin derinlemesine anlaşılması için nitel ve karma desen çalışmaların yapılması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

Sağlık bakımı, interdisipliner, mesleklerarası eğitim, multidisipliner, öğrenci

References

• 1. World Health Organization. Framework for action interprofessional education and collaborative practise. World Health Organization, Department of Human Resources for Health, Geneva; 2010.
• 2. Milutinović D, Lovrić R, Simin D. Interprofessional education and collaborative practice: psychometric analysis of the readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale in undergraduate Serbian healthcare student context. Nurse Education Today. 2010;65:74-80.
• 3. Institude of Medicine (IOM). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health. 2010.
• 4. Towle A, Bainbridge L, Godolphin W, Katz A, Kline C, Lown B, Madularu I, Solomon P, Thistlethwaite J. Active patient involvement in the education of health professionals. Medical Education. 2010;44(1):64-74.
• 5. Lawlis T, Wicks A, Jamieson M, Haughey A, Grealish L. Interprofessional education in practice: evaluation of a work integrated aged care program. Nurse Educ Pract. 2016;17:161–6.
• 6. Harden RM. Interprofessional education: the magical mystery tour now less of a mystery. Anat Sci Educ. 2015;8(4):291-5.
• 7. Timmermans S, Oh H. The continued social transformation of the medical profession. J. Health Soc. Behav. 2010;51:94–106.
• 8. Woermann U, Weltsch L, Kunz A, Stricker D, Guttormsen S. Attitude towards and readiness for ınterprofessional education in medical and nursing student of Bern. GMS Journal for Medical Education. 2016;33(5).
• 9. Ahmad MI, Chan SW, Wong LL, Tan ML, Liaw SY. Are first year healthcare undergraduates at an Asian University ready for interprofessional education? Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2013;4:341-3.
• 10. The Canadian Council for Accreditation of Pharmacy Programs. Accreditation standards for the first professional degree in pharmacy programs. Canada; 2014.
• 11. Committee on accreditation of Canadian Medical Schools. Standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the M.D. degree. Canada; 2015.
• 12. Association for evaluation and accreditation of nursing education programs (HEPDAK). Turkey; 2013.
• 13. Saini B, Shah S, Kearey P, Bosnic-Anticevich S, Grootjans J, Armour C. An interprofessional learning module on asthma health promotion. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2011;75(2):30.
• 14. Aase I, Aase K, Dieckmann P. Teaching interprofessional teamwork in medical and nursing education in Norway: A content analysis. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2013;27(3):238-45.
• 15. Badrawi N, Hosni S, Rashwan M. National academic reference standards (NARS): Medical (Draft). 2nd ed. Egypt: National Authority for Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Education (NAQAAE). 2017.
• 16. Dener H. A Comparison of readiness levels of Hacettepe University physicians, nurses and medical and nursing students on interprofessional learning [Master thesis]. Ankara: Hacettepe University; 2015.
• 17. Council of Higher Education. (2014). Graduate education and teaching regulations. Date of Official Newspaper: 20.04.2016: 29690.
• 18. Kınıklı GI, Erden Z, Elçin M. Awareness of the physiotherapy profession in patient safety and interprofessional cooperation in health sciences: SWOT analysis. Hacettepe University Journal of Faculty of Health Sciences. 2015;2(1):13-21.
• 19. Sarmasoğlu Ş, Elçin M, Masiello İ. Experiences of educator on successful interprofessional education programs: The Case of Karolinska Institute. Hacettepe University Journal of The Nursing Faculty. 2018;5(1):14-28.
• 20. Dunston R, Forman D, Rogers G, Thistlethwaite J, Yassine T, Hager J et al. Curriculum renewal for interprofessional education in health. Centre for Research in Learning and Change, University of Technology, Sydney. 2014.
• 21. Abu-Rish E, Kim S, Choe L, Varpio L, Malik E, White AA, and et al. Current trends in interprofessional education of health sciences students: A literature review. J Interprof Care. 2012;26(6):444-51.
• 22. Nazar H, Obara I, Paterson A, Nazar Z, Portlock J, Husband A. Consensus approach to investigate undergraduate pharmacy students’ experience of interprofessional education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2017;81(2):26.
• 23. Wong AKC, Wong FKY, Chan LK, Chan N, Ganotice FA, Ho J. The effect of interprofessional team-based learning among nursing students: A quasi experimental study. Nurse Education Today. 2017;13–18.
• 24. Talwalkar JS, Fahs DB, Kayingo G, Wong R, Jeon S, Honan L. Readiness for interprofessional learning among healthcare professional students. International Journal of Medical Education. 2016;3:248-52.
• 25. Mahler C, Rochon R, Karstens R, Szecsenyi J, Hermann K. Internal consistency of the readiness for interprofessional learning scale in German health care students and professionals. BMC Medical Education. 2014;14:145.
• 26. Judge MP, Polifroni EC, Zhu S. Influence of student attributes on Readiness for İnterprofessional learning across multiple healthcare disciplines: identifying factors to inform educational development. International Journal of Nursing Sciences. 2015;2:248-52.
• 27. Maharajan MK, Rajiah K, Khoo SP, Chellappan DK, Alwis RD, Chui HC, and et al. Attitudes and readiness of students of healthcare professions towards interprofessional learning. Plos One. 2017;2(1):e0168863.
• 28. Lestari E, Stalmeijer RE, Widyandana D, Scherpbier A. Understanding students readiness for interprofessional learning in an Asian context: A mixed-methods study. BMC Medical Education. 2016;16:179.
• 29. Zorek JA, Blaszczyk AT, Haase MR, Raehl CL. Practice site readiness for interprofessional education (PRIPE): instrument development and pilot study. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning. 2014;1:32-40.
• 30. Mafinejad MK, Ahmady S, Arabshahi SKS, Bigdeli S. Effective factors in the design and implementation of the interprofessional education from the faculty members’ perspective: A qualitative study. Res Dev Med Educ. 2013;2(1):25-30.
• 31. Parsell G, Bligh J. Interprofessional learning. Postgraduate Medical Journal. 1998;74:89-95.
• 32. McFadyen AK, Webster V, Strachan K, Figgins E, Brown H, Mckechnie J. The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale: a possible more stable sub-scale model for the original version of RIPLS. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2005;19(6):595-603.
• 33. Onan A, Turan S, Elcin M, Simsek N, Deniz KZ. A test adaptation of the modified Readiness for Inter-professional Learning Scale in Turkish. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research. 2017;51(2):207-15.
• 34. Keshtkaran Z, Sharif F, Rambod M. Students' readiness for and perception of inter-professional learning: a cross-sectional study. Nurse Education Today. 2014;34(4):991- 8.
• 35. Baker L, Egan-Lee E, Martimianakis MA, Reeves S. Relationships of power: implications for interprofessional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2011;25:98–104.