通过基于技能的模拟,培养执业前跨专业和中风护理能力。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Interprofessional Care Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1080/13561820.2024.2371339
Diane MacKenzie, Kaitlin Sibbald, Kim Sponagle, Ellen Hickey, Gail Creaser, Kim Hebert, Gordon Gubitz, Anu Mishra, Marc Nicholson, Gordon E Sarty
{"title":"通过基于技能的模拟,培养执业前跨专业和中风护理能力。","authors":"Diane MacKenzie, Kaitlin Sibbald, Kim Sponagle, Ellen Hickey, Gail Creaser, Kim Hebert, Gordon Gubitz, Anu Mishra, Marc Nicholson, Gordon E Sarty","doi":"10.1080/13561820.2024.2371339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in stroke care is accepted as best practice and necessary given the multi-system challenges and array of professionals involved. Our two-part stroke team simulations offer an intentional interprofessional educational experience (IPE) embedded in pre-licensure occupational therapy, physical therapy, pharmacy, medicine, nursing and speech-language pathology curricula. This six-year mixed method program evaluation aimed to determine if simulation delivery differences necessitated by COVID-19 impacted students' IPC perception, ratings, and reported learning. Following both simulations, the <i>Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Assessment Scale</i> (ICCAS) and free-text self-reported learning was voluntarily and anonymously collected. A factorial ANOVA using the ICCAS interprofessional competency factors compared scores across delivery methods. Content and category analysis was done for free-text responses. Overall, delivery formats did not affect positive changes in pre-post ICCAS scores. However, pre and post ICCAS scores were significantly different for interprofessional competencies of roles/responsibilities and collaborative patient/family centered approach. Analysis of over 10,000 written response to four open-ended questions revealed the simulation designs evoked better understanding of others' and own scope of practice, how roles and shared leadership change based on context and client need, and the value of each team member's expertise. Virtual-experience-only students noted preference for an in-person stroke clinic simulation opportunity.</p>","PeriodicalId":50174,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing pre-licensure interprofessional and stroke care competencies through skills-based simulations.\",\"authors\":\"Diane MacKenzie, Kaitlin Sibbald, Kim Sponagle, Ellen Hickey, Gail Creaser, Kim Hebert, Gordon Gubitz, Anu Mishra, Marc Nicholson, Gordon E Sarty\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13561820.2024.2371339\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in stroke care is accepted as best practice and necessary given the multi-system challenges and array of professionals involved. Our two-part stroke team simulations offer an intentional interprofessional educational experience (IPE) embedded in pre-licensure occupational therapy, physical therapy, pharmacy, medicine, nursing and speech-language pathology curricula. This six-year mixed method program evaluation aimed to determine if simulation delivery differences necessitated by COVID-19 impacted students' IPC perception, ratings, and reported learning. Following both simulations, the <i>Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Assessment Scale</i> (ICCAS) and free-text self-reported learning was voluntarily and anonymously collected. A factorial ANOVA using the ICCAS interprofessional competency factors compared scores across delivery methods. Content and category analysis was done for free-text responses. Overall, delivery formats did not affect positive changes in pre-post ICCAS scores. However, pre and post ICCAS scores were significantly different for interprofessional competencies of roles/responsibilities and collaborative patient/family centered approach. Analysis of over 10,000 written response to four open-ended questions revealed the simulation designs evoked better understanding of others' and own scope of practice, how roles and shared leadership change based on context and client need, and the value of each team member's expertise. Virtual-experience-only students noted preference for an in-person stroke clinic simulation opportunity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interprofessional Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interprofessional Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2024.2371339\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2024.2371339","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

中风护理中的跨专业合作(IPC)已被公认为最佳实践,而且由于涉及多系统挑战和一系列专业人员,这种合作也是必要的。我们由两部分组成的中风团队模拟提供了一种有意识的跨专业教育体验(IPE),嵌入到职业治疗、物理治疗、药学、医学、护理和言语病理学的执照前课程中。这项为期六年的混合方法项目评估旨在确定 COVID-19 所要求的模拟交付差异是否会影响学生对 IPC 的感知、评价和所报告的学习情况。在两次模拟之后,以自愿和匿名的方式收集了跨专业协作能力评估量表(ICCAS)和自由文本的自我学习报告。使用 ICCAS 跨专业能力因子进行因子方差分析,比较了不同授课方法的得分。对自由文本回答进行了内容和类别分析。总的来说,授课形式并没有影响 ICCAS 前后得分的积极变化。但是,在角色/责任和以病人/家庭为中心的合作方法等跨专业能力方面,ICCAS 的前后得分有明显差异。对四个开放式问题的 10,000 多份书面答复进行分析后发现,模拟设计能让学生更好地理解他人和自己的实践范围、角色和共同领导力如何根据环境和客户需求发生变化,以及每个团队成员专业知识的价值。仅有虚拟体验的学生表示更喜欢现场中风门诊模拟机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Developing pre-licensure interprofessional and stroke care competencies through skills-based simulations.

Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in stroke care is accepted as best practice and necessary given the multi-system challenges and array of professionals involved. Our two-part stroke team simulations offer an intentional interprofessional educational experience (IPE) embedded in pre-licensure occupational therapy, physical therapy, pharmacy, medicine, nursing and speech-language pathology curricula. This six-year mixed method program evaluation aimed to determine if simulation delivery differences necessitated by COVID-19 impacted students' IPC perception, ratings, and reported learning. Following both simulations, the Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Assessment Scale (ICCAS) and free-text self-reported learning was voluntarily and anonymously collected. A factorial ANOVA using the ICCAS interprofessional competency factors compared scores across delivery methods. Content and category analysis was done for free-text responses. Overall, delivery formats did not affect positive changes in pre-post ICCAS scores. However, pre and post ICCAS scores were significantly different for interprofessional competencies of roles/responsibilities and collaborative patient/family centered approach. Analysis of over 10,000 written response to four open-ended questions revealed the simulation designs evoked better understanding of others' and own scope of practice, how roles and shared leadership change based on context and client need, and the value of each team member's expertise. Virtual-experience-only students noted preference for an in-person stroke clinic simulation opportunity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Interprofessional Care
Journal of Interprofessional Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
14.80%
发文量
124
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interprofessional Care disseminates research and new developments in the field of interprofessional education and practice. We welcome contributions containing an explicit interprofessional focus, and involving a range of settings, professions, and fields. Areas of practice covered include primary, community and hospital care, health education and public health, and beyond health and social care into fields such as criminal justice and primary/elementary education. Papers introducing additional interprofessional views, for example, from a community development or environmental design perspective, are welcome. The Journal is disseminated internationally and encourages submissions from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Interprofessional education in traditional and complementary medicine: a scoping review. Patients' experiences of involvement at a clinical training ward: a qualitative interview study. The Bright Ideas TBI Camp: fostering innovation in interprofessional education and collaborative practice for traumatic brain injury by students in rehabilitation professions. Qualitative focus group study of interprofessional healthcare providers to inform the development of a virtual psychoeducational training program for the treatment of childhood interpersonal trauma. Rethinking IPE duration: a five-year comparative analysis of competency development across two introductory IPE course models.
×
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