Interprofessional Education in the Internal Medicine Clerkship Post-LCME Standard Issuance: Results of a National Survey
- PMID: 28284014
- PMCID: PMC5515782
- DOI: 10.1007/s11606-017-4004-3
Interprofessional Education in the Internal Medicine Clerkship Post-LCME Standard Issuance: Results of a National Survey
Abstract
Background: Several decades of work have detailed the value and goals of interprofessional education (IPE) within the health professions, defining IPE competencies and best practices. In 2013, the Liaison Committee for Medical Education (LCME) elevated IPE to a U.S. medical school accreditation standard.
Objective: To examine the status of IPE within internal medicine (IM) clerkships including perspectives, curricular content, barriers, and assessment a year after the LCME standard issuance.
Design: Anonymous online survey.
Participants: IM clerkship directors from each of the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine's 121 U.S. and Canadian member medical schools in 2014.
Methods: In 2014, a section on IPE (18 items) was included in the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine annual survey of its 121 U.S. and Canadian member medical schools.
Main measures: Items (18) assessed clerkship director (CD) perspectives, status of IPE curricula in IM clerkships, and barriers to IPE implementation. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis of free-text responses to one of the survey questions.
Key results: The overall survey response rate was 78% (94/121). The majority (88%) agreed that IPE is important to the practice of IM, and 71% believed IPE should be part of the IM clerkship. Most (76%) CDs agreed there is need for faculty development programs in IPE; 27% had such a program at their institution. Lack of curricular time, scheduling conflicts, and lack of faculty trained in IPE were the most frequently cited barriers. Twenty-nine percent had formal IPE activities within their IM clerkships, and 38% were planning to make changes. Of those with formal IPE activities, over a third (37%) did not involve student assessment.
Conclusions: Since LCME standard issuance, only a minority of IM clerkships have included formal IPE activities, with lectures as the predominant method. Opportunities exist for enhancing educational methods as well as IPE faculty development.
Keywords: interprofessional education; medical education; undergraduate medical education.
Conflict of interest statement
Funders
None.
Prior Presentations
This work was presented at the plenary session at the Academic Internal Medicine Week 2015 meeting of the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine and the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine in Atlanta, GA.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
Figures
Comment in
-
Interprofessional Health Sciences Education: It's Time to Overcome Barriers and Excuses.J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Aug;32(8):858-859. doi: 10.1007/s11606-017-4069-z. J Gen Intern Med. 2017. PMID: 28497414 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Medicine, Politics, and the English Language.J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Aug;32(8):853-854. doi: 10.1007/s11606-017-4081-3. J Gen Intern Med. 2017. PMID: 28547722 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- LCME. ED-19-A. 2014; http://www.lcme.org/connections/connections_2014-2015/ED-19-A_2014-2015.htm. Accessed 12/17/2016.
-
- IECEP. Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel. Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: report of an expert panel. Washington, DC; 2011.
-
- Interprofessional Education Collaborative . Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: 2016 update. Washington, DC: Interprofessional Education Collaborative; 2016.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
