Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Apr 29;33(2):Doc22.
doi: 10.3205/zma001021. eCollection 2016.

Evaluation of interprofessional education: lessons learned through the development and implementation of an interprofessional seminar on team communication for undergraduate health care students in Heidelberg - a project report

Sarah Berger  1 , Cornelia Mahler  1 , Katja Krug  1 , Joachim Szecsenyi  1 , Jobst-Hendrik Schultz  2
Affiliations

Evaluation of interprofessional education: lessons learned through the development and implementation of an interprofessional seminar on team communication for undergraduate health care students in Heidelberg - a project report

Sarah Berger et al. GMS J Med Educ. .

Abstract
in English, German

Introduction: This project report describes the development, "piloting" and evaluation of an interprofessional seminar on team communication bringing together medical students and Interprofessional Health Care B.Sc. students at the Medical Faculty of Heidelberg University, Germany.

Project description: A five-member interprofessional team collaborated together on this project. Kolb's experiential learning concept formed the theoretical foundation for the seminar, which explored three interprofessional competency areas: team work, communication and values/ethics. Evaluation for the purposes of quality assurance and future curricula development was conducted using two quantitative measures: descriptive analysis of a standardized course evaluation tool (EvaSys) ANOVA analysis of the German translation of the University of the West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire (UWE-IP-D).

Results: The key finding from the standardized course evaluation was that the interprofessional seminars were rated more positively [M=2.11 (1 most positive and 5 most negative), SD=1, n=27] than the monoprofessional seminars [M=2.55, SD=0.98, n=90]. The key finding from the UWE-IP-D survey, comparing pre and post scores of the interprofessional (IP) (n=40) and monoprofessional (MP) groups (n=34), was that significant positive changes in mean scores for both groups towards communication, teamwork and interprofessional learning occurred.

Conclusions: Lessons learnt included: a) recognising the benefit of being pragmatic when introducing interprofessional education initiatives, which enabled various logistical and attitudinal barriers to be overcome; b) quantitative evaluation of learning outcomes alone could not explain positive responses or potential influences of interprofessional aspects, which highlighted the need for a mixed methods approach, including qualitative methods, to enrich judgment formation on interprofessional educational outcomes.

Einleitung: Dieser Projektbericht beschreibt die Entwicklung, Pilotierung und Evaluation eines interprofessionellen Seminars zur Team-Kommunikation, das Studierende der Humanmedizin und Studierende des Studiengangs Interprofessionelle Gesundheitsversorgung B.Sc. an der Medizinische Fakultät der Universität Heidelberg zusammengebracht hat.Projektbeschreibung: Ein fünfköpfiges interprofessionelles Team arbeitete zusammen an diesem Projekt. Kolbs Theorie des erfahrungsorientierten Lernens bildete die theoretische Grundlage für das Seminar, in dem drei interprofessionelle Kompetenzdomänen vermittelt wurden: Teamarbeit, Kommunikation und Werte/Ethik. Die Evaluation zum Zwecke der Qualitätssicherung und der zukünftigen curricularen Entwicklung wurde mit zwei quantitativen Instrumenten durchgeführt:deskriptive Analyse eines standardisierten Kurs-Bewertungsinstruments (EvaSys) Varianzanalyse (ANOVA) der deutschen Version des Fragebogens „University of the West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire“ (UWE-IP-D).Ergebnisse: Das Hauptergebnis der standardisierten Kursevaluation war, dass die interprofessionellen Seminare positiver bewertet wurden [MW=2,11 (Bereich: 1 sehr positiv bis 5 sehr negativ), SD=1, n=27] als die monoprofessionellen Seminare [MW=2,55, SD=0,98, n=90]. Der Vergleich der Vorher-/Nachher-Ergebnisse in der UWE-IP-D Befragung der interprofessionellen (IP) (n=40) und monoprofessionellen (MP) Gruppen (n=34) zeigte signifikante positive Veränderungen der Mittelwerte für beide Gruppen hinsichtlich Kommunikation, Teamarbeit und interprofessionellem Lernen. Schlussfolgerungen: Erkenntnisgewinne aus dem Projekt: a) Nutzen einer pragmatischen Vorgehensweise bei der Einführung interprofessioneller Ausbildungssequenzen, die es ermöglichte, dass verschiedene Barrieren bzgl. Logistik sowie Einstellung/Haltung überwunden werden konnten; b) eine quantitative Evaluation allein konnte die positiven Rückmeldungen des interprofessionellen Settings nicht erfassen. Dies erfordert einen Mixed-Methods-Ansatz inklusive qualitativer Methoden, um die Effekte interprofessioneller Ausbildung besser zu verstehen.

Keywords: communication; competency-based education; interdisciplinary health team; interprofessional relations; professional education.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Attitudes to “Communication & Teamwork” (MP Group versus IP Group). Communication & Teamwork Scale: 9 items; 5-point Likert scale; Sum score range: 9 most positive to 36 most negative
Figure 2
Figure 2. Attitudes to “Interprofessional Learning” (MP Group versus IP Group). Interprofessional Learning Scale: 9 items; 5-point Likert scale; Sum score range: 9 most positive to 45 most negative
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organisation. Preparing a health care workforce for the 21st century: the challenge of chronic conditions. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2005. Available from: http://www.who.int/chp/knowledge/publications/workforce_report.pdf?ua=1. - PubMed
    1. Alscher MD, Büscher A, Dielmann G, Hopfeld M, Höppner H, Igl G, Kuhlmey A, Matzkell U, Satrapa-Schill A. Memorandum Kooperation der Gesundheitsberufe. Qualität und Sicherung der Gesundheitsversorgung von morgen. Stuttgart: Robert Bosch Stiftung; 2010. Available from: http://www.bosch-stiftung.de/content/language1/downloads/Memorandum_Koop.... - PubMed
    1. Zwarenstein M, Goldman J, Reeves S. Interprofessional collaboration: effects of practice-based interventions on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;8(3):CD000072. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000072.pub2. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000072.pub2. - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gordon F. Combined Universities Interprofessional Learning Unit Final Report. Sheffield: The University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University; 2006. Available from: http://caipe.org.uk/silo/files/cuilupdf.pdf.
    1. Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative. A national interprofessional competency framework. Vancouver BC: Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative; 2010. Available from: http://www.cihc.ca/files/CIHC_IPCompetencies_Feb1210.pdf.