Measuring Stereotypes in Interprofessional Education: A Pilot High-Fidelity Simulation Study Among Postgraduate Nursing and Physician Students in a Spanish University.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Healthcare Pub Date : 2024-12-05 DOI:10.3390/healthcare12232449
Juan Manuel Cánovas-Pallarés, Sergio Nieto-Caballero, Manuel Baeza-Mirete, Manuel José Párraga-Ramírez, Andrés Rojo-Rojo
{"title":"Measuring Stereotypes in Interprofessional Education: A Pilot High-Fidelity Simulation Study Among Postgraduate Nursing and Physician Students in a Spanish University.","authors":"Juan Manuel Cánovas-Pallarés, Sergio Nieto-Caballero, Manuel Baeza-Mirete, Manuel José Párraga-Ramírez, Andrés Rojo-Rojo","doi":"10.3390/healthcare12232449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>Nursing professionals are often subject to social stereotypes that can hinder effective teamwork with other healthcare professionals and limit their professional growth. Interprofessional education (IPE) enhances teamwork skills and promotes a better understanding of other professional groups. This study aimed to identify the presence of stereotypes associated with nursing among postgraduate nursing and student physicians specializing in emergency medicine and to assess the applicability of simulation as an IPE strategy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A pilot study using high-fidelity simulation activity focusing on interdisciplinary collaboration was designed for students in the master's programs in emergency nursing and emergency medicine at the Catholic University of Murcia. The activity took place in May 2024 and involved 52 participants (24 postgraduate nursing students and 28 postgraduate student physicians). A mixed-method descriptive study was conducted using a 16-item self-administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test for normality, Fisher's F test, and the Mann-Whitney U test to evaluate the relationship between variables (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 22 questionnaires were collected (16 from nurses postgraduate student and 6 from postgraduate physicians). Positive attitudes toward nursing stereotypes were found in 9 of the 13 items. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding most stereotypes, except for one. Negative stereotypes about nursing leadership, professional autonomy, and patient relations were more prominent among nursing students.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Stereotypical perceptions exist among both postgraduate nursing and postgraduate student physicians, particularly in nursing leadership and autonomy. Most participants expressed satisfaction with the simulation-based IPE activity, indicating its value in improving the understanding of other professionals' roles. IPE should be incorporated into health sciences education.</p>","PeriodicalId":12977,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare","volume":"12 23","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12232449","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/objectives: Nursing professionals are often subject to social stereotypes that can hinder effective teamwork with other healthcare professionals and limit their professional growth. Interprofessional education (IPE) enhances teamwork skills and promotes a better understanding of other professional groups. This study aimed to identify the presence of stereotypes associated with nursing among postgraduate nursing and student physicians specializing in emergency medicine and to assess the applicability of simulation as an IPE strategy.

Methods: A pilot study using high-fidelity simulation activity focusing on interdisciplinary collaboration was designed for students in the master's programs in emergency nursing and emergency medicine at the Catholic University of Murcia. The activity took place in May 2024 and involved 52 participants (24 postgraduate nursing students and 28 postgraduate student physicians). A mixed-method descriptive study was conducted using a 16-item self-administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test for normality, Fisher's F test, and the Mann-Whitney U test to evaluate the relationship between variables (p < 0.05).

Results: A total of 22 questionnaires were collected (16 from nurses postgraduate student and 6 from postgraduate physicians). Positive attitudes toward nursing stereotypes were found in 9 of the 13 items. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding most stereotypes, except for one. Negative stereotypes about nursing leadership, professional autonomy, and patient relations were more prominent among nursing students.

Conclusions: Stereotypical perceptions exist among both postgraduate nursing and postgraduate student physicians, particularly in nursing leadership and autonomy. Most participants expressed satisfaction with the simulation-based IPE activity, indicating its value in improving the understanding of other professionals' roles. IPE should be incorporated into health sciences education.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
衡量跨专业教育中的陈规定型观念:在西班牙一所大学的护理和医生研究生中开展高仿真模拟试点研究。
背景/目的:护理专业人员经常受到社会成见的影响,这些成见会阻碍他们与其他医疗保健专业人员进行有效的团队合作,并限制他们的专业发展。跨专业教育(IPE)可增强团队合作技能,促进对其他专业群体的了解。本研究旨在确定急诊医学专业的护理研究生和医师学生是否存在与护理相关的刻板印象,并评估模拟作为 IPE 策略的适用性:针对穆尔西亚天主教大学急诊护理和急诊医学硕士课程的学生,设计了一项以跨学科合作为重点的高保真模拟活动试点研究。活动于 2024 年 5 月举行,共有 52 人参加(24 名护理专业研究生和 28 名医师专业研究生)。该研究采用混合方法进行描述性研究,使用 16 个项目的自填式问卷。采用 Shapiro-Wilk 正态性检验、Fisher's F 检验和 Mann-Whitney U 检验对数据进行分析,以评估变量之间的关系(P < 0.05):共收集到 22 份问卷(16 份来自护士研究生,6 份来自医生研究生)。在 13 个项目中,有 9 个项目对护理刻板印象持积极态度。除一项定型观念外,各组之间在大多数定型观念上没有发现明显的统计学差异。护生对护理领导力、专业自主性和患者关系的负面刻板印象更为突出:护理研究生和医生研究生都存在刻板印象,尤其是在护理领导力和自主性方面。大多数参与者对基于模拟的 IPE 活动表示满意,这表明该活动在增进对其他专业人员角色的了解方面很有价值。应将 IPE 纳入健康科学教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare
Healthcare Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal (free for readers), which publishes original theoretical and empirical work in the interdisciplinary area of all aspects of medicine and health care research. Healthcare publishes Original Research Articles, Reviews, Case Reports, Research Notes and Short Communications. We encourage researchers to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. For theoretical papers, full details of proofs must be provided so that the results can be checked; for experimental papers, full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additionally, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculations, experimental procedure, etc., can be deposited along with the publication as “Supplementary Material”.
期刊最新文献
Cost-Effectiveness of the Pneumococcal Vaccine in the Adult Population: A Systematic Review. Polish Firefighters' Participation in Interventions Related to Behavioral Disorders in the 2020-2022 Period: An Observation of Incidents. What Helps or Hinders End-of-Life Care in Adult Intensive Care Units in Saudi Arabia? A Mixed-Methods Study Protocol. Impact of a Clinical Decision Support System on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Performing Medication Reviews in Community Pharmacies: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Benefits of Complementary Therapies During Pregnancy, Childbirth and Postpartum Period: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1