The growing complexity of care and healthcare workforce shortages in the Netherlands necessitates exploring interprofessional collaboration (IPC). However, the predominant single-professional education may result in a professional identity (PI) among healthcare students, which may not support successful IPC. Internships in student-run interprofessional learning wards (SR-IPLW) could foster interprofessional identity (IPI) development. There is a need for a better understanding of the intricacies involved in learning to work collaboratively, particularly when undergraduates are still shaping their professional identities. Our aim, therefore, was to identify facilitators and barriers for interprofessional education (IPE), IPC, and identity development among 21 healthcare students during a 20-week clinical placement on a SR-IPLW in rehabilitation medicine. An action-based prospective study using grounded theory analysis of nine focus groups across three semesters identified 17 theoretical codes. These codes are elaborated in a conceptual model highlighting facilitators and barriers for IPC and identity development, emphasizing the importance of fostering feelings of relatedness, competence, and autonomy. There are indications that professional and interprofessional identities changed during the internship. Implications for preceptors are delineated, showing the importance of personal relationships and elements of a positive learning climate.
Background: The number of people with multiple chronic conditions requiring primary care services increases. Professionals from different disciplines collaborate and coordinate care to deal with the complex health care needs. There is lack of information on current practices regarding interprofessional team (IPT) meetings. Objectives: This study aimed to improve our understanding of the process of interprofessional collaboration in primary care team meetings in the Netherlands by observing the current practice and exploring personal opinions. Methods. Qualitative study involving observations of team meetings and interviews with participants. Eight different IPT meetings (n = 8) in different primary care practices were observed by means of video recordings. Experiences were explored by conducting individual semi-structured interviews (n = 60) with participants (i.e. health care professionals from different disciplines) of the observed team meetings. The data were analysed by means of content analysis. Results: Most participants expressed favourable opinions about their team meetings. However, observations showed that team meetings were more or less hectic, and lacked a clear structure and team coordinator or leader. There appears to be a discrepancy between findings from observations and interviews. From the interviews, four main themes were extracted: (1) Team structure and composition, (2) Patient-centredness, (3) Interaction and (4) Attitude and motivation. Conclusion: IPT meetings could benefit from improvements in structure, patient-centredness and leadership by the chairpersons. Given the discrepancy between observations and interviews, it would appear useful to improve team members’ awareness of aspects that could be improved before training them in dealing with specific challenges.
Background Interprofessional education is promoted as a means of enhancing future collaborative practice in healthcare. We developed a learning activity in which undergraduate medical, nursing and allied healthcare students practice interprofessional collaboration during a student-led interprofessional team meeting. Design and delivery During their clinical rotation at a family physician’s practice, each medical student visits a frail elderly patient and prepares a care plan for the patient. At a student-led interprofessional team meeting, medical, nursing and allied healthcare students jointly review these care plans. Subsequently, participating students reflect on their interprofessional collaboration during the team meeting, both collectively and individually. Every 4 weeks, six interprofessional team meetings take place. Each team comprises 9–10 students from various healthcare professions, and meets once. To date an average of 360 medical and 360 nursing and allied healthcare students have participated in this course annually. Evaluation Students mostly reported positive experiences, including the opportunity to learn with, from and about other healthcare professions in the course of jointly reviewing care plans, and feeling collectively responsible for the care of the patients involved. Additionally, students reported a better understanding of the contextual factors at hand. The variety of patient cases, diversity of participating health professions, and the course material need improvement. Conclusion Students from participating institutions confirmed that attending a student-led interprofessional team meeting had enabled them to learn with, from and about other health professions in an active role. The use of real-life cases and the educational design contributed to the positive outcome of this interprofessional learning activity.
