Background: Frailty and multimorbidity are common among patients in geriatric rehabilitation care (GRC). Proper care of these patients involves multiple professionals which requires optimal interprofessional collaboration to provide the best possible support. Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) goes beyond multi-professional collaboration. It requires professionals to think beyond the expertise of their own discipline and work on joint outcomes in which the patient is actively involved. This study describes the development of the GRC teams of an elderly care organization towards the IPC. Methods: Mixed method pre-post study of 15 months. The interprofessional training program comprised team trainings, webinars, and online team sessions. Data was aggregated by administering the Extended Professional Identity Scale (EPIS) and QuickScan Interprofessional Collaboration (QS) measurements to GRC staff and by observations of the multi-professional team consultation (MPC) meetings of six GRC teams of an organization for elderly care in Drachten and Dokkum in the Netherlands. ADL independence (Barthel Index) and number of inpatient days were analyzed before and after the project. Results: Pretest healthcare professional response was 106, patients for analyses was 181; posttest response was 84, patients was 170. The EPIS shows improvement on “interprofessional belonging” (P =.001, 95%CI: 0.57–2.21), “interprofessional commitment” (P =.027, 95%CI: 0.12–1.90), and overall “interprofessional identity” (P =.013, 95%CI: 0.62 − 5.20). On the QS, all domains improved; “shared values” (P =.009, 95%CI: 0.07 − 0.47), “context” (P =.005, 95%CI: 0.08 − 0.44), “structure & organization” (P =.001, 95%CI: 0.14 − 0.56), “group dynamics & interaction” (P
Although Item Response Theory (IRT) has been recommended for helping advance interprofessional education (IPE) research, its use remains limited. This may be partly explained by potential misconceptions regarding IRT`s “limitation” to cross-sectional data. The aim of this study is to demonstrate how Item Response Theory (IRT) can be applied effectively in before-and-after designs in IPE research. Specifically, a two-week before-after design with survey methodology using the Extended Professional Identity Scale (EPIS), an interprofessional identity measure, was conducted among n = 146 mixed health-science students. Results indicated that EPIS increased significantly before-after intervention by.74 standardised mean differences, t146 = 7.73, p
PURPOSE: Malnutrition and sarcopenia require dietetic and physiotherapy interventions. In this study, we aimed to compare interprofessional identity of dietitians and physiotherapists, as well as attitudes towards, facilitators and barriers for, and occurrence of interprofessional treatment of malnutrition and sarcopenia by both professions.METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed from December 4, 2021 until January 31, 2022 through an international online network platform for professionals (LinkedIn). Practitioners working as dietitian or physiotherapist in a healthcare setting were eligible for participation. Outcome measures concerned perceptions regarding shared problem domains, interprofessional treatment, attitudes towards interprofessional treatment, interprofessional identity, facilitators, and barriers. A Chi 2-test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Spearman's Rho correlation were calculated. RESULTS: Data from 53 physiotherapists and 48 dietitians were included. Malnutrition is considered a shared problem domain by both professions ( U = 1248.000; p = 0.858). While sarcopenia is treated by both professions ( U = 1260.000; p = 0.927), physiotherapists consider sarcopenia more often a shared problem domain compared to dietitians ( U = 1003.000; p = 0.044). Attitudes towards interprofessional treatment were mostly positive (73%, n = 35 and 87%, n = 46 respectively). Interprofessional identity of dietitians was lower compared to physiotherapists (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.3 respectively; U = 875.000, p = 0.007). This was explained by lower interprofessional belonging (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.8 respectively; U = 771.000, p < 0.001) and lower interprofessional commitment (median = 4.0 versus median = 4.3 respectively; U = 942.500, p = 0.023). Interprofessional identity was correlated with efficient means of communication ( r = 0.30, p = 0.003) and bureaucracy ( r = -0.21, p = 0.034). Other barriers reported included available time, financial compensation, interprofessional knowledge, and obtaining extra care. Most reported facilitators concerned role clarity, clarity of expertise, and willingness of others to collaborate. CONCLUSION: Dietitians and physiotherapists have different interprofessional identities, but both are advocates of interprofessional treatment. Both professions mostly treat malnutrition and sarcopenia individually and have different perceptions regarding sarcopenia as shared problem domain. Facilitators were mainly related to clarity and commitment while barriers were mainly related to resources.
