Elmi Zwaan, Nina Zipfel, Wietske Kuijer-Siebelink, Shirley Oomens, Sylvia J van der Burg-Vermeulen
{"title":"Barriers and Facilitators for Interprofessional Education in Work-Focused Healthcare: An Integrative Review.","authors":"Elmi Zwaan, Nina Zipfel, Wietske Kuijer-Siebelink, Shirley Oomens, Sylvia J van der Burg-Vermeulen","doi":"10.1007/s10926-025-10278-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To identify, summarize, and synthesize barriers and facilitators associated with interprofessional education (IPE) for work-focused healthcare professionals such as occupational physicians, social insurance physicians, and labor experts, to inform and stimulate interprofessional collaborative practice within the field of work-focused healthcare.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An integrative review was conducted to identify studies that report on IPE for work-focused healthcare professionals. Eight databases (APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, ERIC, Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science) were searched until March 2024. Reference lists of included articles were screened. Inclusion criteria were a description of an IPE activity of which at least one group of participants were work-focused healthcare professionals (in training). Barriers and facilitators were structured using the framework of Measurement Instruments for Determinants of Innovation (MIDI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 6123 studies, seven were included. Barriers and facilitators were identified for each level of the MIDI framework. For example, at the level of characteristics of the IPE activity, involvement of skilled educators and reflection opportunities facilitated IPE. At the level of characteristics of IPE participants, role misunderstanding and lack of interaction hindered IPE. At the level of the organizational context, connection to work practice facilitated IPE. At the level of socio-political context, lack of support from external organizations hindered IPE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Insights from this review can inform future IPE development. It is recommended that IPE is integrated in a learning continuum, is connected to daily practice, and includes reflection possibilities and training for interprofessional competencies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-025-10278-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To identify, summarize, and synthesize barriers and facilitators associated with interprofessional education (IPE) for work-focused healthcare professionals such as occupational physicians, social insurance physicians, and labor experts, to inform and stimulate interprofessional collaborative practice within the field of work-focused healthcare.
Methods: An integrative review was conducted to identify studies that report on IPE for work-focused healthcare professionals. Eight databases (APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, ERIC, Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science) were searched until March 2024. Reference lists of included articles were screened. Inclusion criteria were a description of an IPE activity of which at least one group of participants were work-focused healthcare professionals (in training). Barriers and facilitators were structured using the framework of Measurement Instruments for Determinants of Innovation (MIDI).
Results: From 6123 studies, seven were included. Barriers and facilitators were identified for each level of the MIDI framework. For example, at the level of characteristics of the IPE activity, involvement of skilled educators and reflection opportunities facilitated IPE. At the level of characteristics of IPE participants, role misunderstanding and lack of interaction hindered IPE. At the level of the organizational context, connection to work practice facilitated IPE. At the level of socio-political context, lack of support from external organizations hindered IPE.
Conclusion: Insights from this review can inform future IPE development. It is recommended that IPE is integrated in a learning continuum, is connected to daily practice, and includes reflection possibilities and training for interprofessional competencies.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on the rehabilitation, reintegration, and prevention of disability in workers. The journal offers investigations involving original data collection and research synthesis (i.e., scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses). Papers derive from a broad array of fields including rehabilitation medicine, physical and occupational therapy, health psychology and psychiatry, orthopedics, oncology, occupational and insurance medicine, neurology, social work, ergonomics, biomedical engineering, health economics, rehabilitation engineering, business administration and management, and law. A single interdisciplinary source for information on work disability rehabilitation, the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation helps to advance the scientific understanding, management, and prevention of work disability.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
