Collaboration readiness: Developing standards for interprofessional formative assessment.

BACKGROUND: Graduate nursing education strives to promote collaborative practice on interprofessional teams. However, measuring collaboration during formative stages of professional development is rare. Few assessments are available to determine whether graduates of nursing education programs have met the required accreditation benchmarks. This project evaluates two performance standards for assessing collaboration during formative assessments. METHOD: Formative assessment of communication and collaboration skills was explored for 62 entry-level Master's students in nursing, using a team-based objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) involving two patient simulations and assessment checklists, and comparing normative (relative standard) and criterion-referenced (absolute standard) methods. RESULTS: Mean percentages of behaviors using the normative approach indicated a range of performance levels for particular communication and collaboration behaviors. Criterion-referenced standards were higher than normative standards from actual student performance. CONCLUSION: This method improves assessment of collaboration through OSCEs using normative and criterion-referenced standards. We recommend using both methods jointly when setting standards or qualifying scores.

Comparison of Dental Students' Perceived Value of Faculty vs. Peer Feedback on Non-Technical Clinical Competency Assessments.

Although reviewing dental students' clinical competency assessments is an important aspect of instruction, finding time to give individual feedback to each student poses a challenge for faculty members, and some students may prefer to receive feedback from a peer. The aim of this study was to explore dental students' perceived value of feedback on their performance in a simulated patient care activity from either a faculty member or a peer. Participants were third- and fourth-year dental students who had completed two years of interprofessional instruction and a videotaped objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with standardized patients. Participants in two cohorts were randomly assigned to a faculty or peer feedback group. Cohort one (2015-16) consisted of 66 students: 21 in faculty-led groups, and 45 in peer-led groups. Cohort two (2017) consisted of 60 students: 17 in faculty-led groups, and 43 in peer-led groups. In both types of pairings, the protocol consisted of jointly observing a video recording of student performance in the simulated patient encounter and discussing questions about the student's performance in non-technical competencies such as communication, patient safety, scope of practice, and conflict resolution. For cohort two, prior to the feedback sessions, students in the peer feedback groups received a 60-minute training on providing constructive feedback. All 126 students in the two cohorts completed an evaluation questionnaire after the experience. The results showed that students in both types of feedback sessions perceived value in the feedback and believed it enhanced their skills. However, students rated faculty feedback significantly higher (p<0.05) than peer feedback on nearly all dimensions. Perceived value did not differ by age, gender, class year, or OSCE performance. These results provide support for the value of peer feedback on nontechnical clinical competency assessments, though not as a substitute for faculty feedback.

Interprofessional education: a review and analysis of programs from three academic health centers.

The past decade witnessed momentum toward redesigning the U.S. health care system with the intent to improve quality of care. To achieve and sustain this change, health professions education must likewise reform to prepare future practitioners to optimize their ability to participate in the new paradigm of health care delivery. Recognizing that interprofessional education (IPE) is gaining momentum as a crucial aspect of health care professions training, this article provides an introduction to IPE programs from three different academic health centers, which were developed and implemented to train health care practitioners who provide patient-centered, collaborative care. The three participating programs are briefly described, as well as the processes and some lessons learned that were critical in the process of adopting IPE programs in their respective institutions. Critical aspects of each program are described to allow comparison of the critical building blocks for developing an IPE program. Among those building blocks, the authors present information on the planning processes of the different institutions, the competencies that each program aims to instill in the graduates, the snapshot of the three curricular models, and the assessment strategies used by each institution. The authors conclude by providing details that may provide insight for academic institutions considering implementation of IPE programs.

Interprofessional Education program, Western University of Health Sciences.

In January 2010, Western University of Health Sciences launched the first phase of its Interprofessional Education (IPE) program. Our mission is to produce humanistic healthcare professionals who practice collaborative patient-centered care. The university wide comprehensive IPE program model includes didactic, experiential and clinical care phases. The first phase of the IPE program, didactic, rolled out during the 2009-2010 academic year. While the data from the first year is still being evaluated, initial indicators reveal the launching of the first year of the program was a success. Assessment is and will continue to be an essential aspect of every phase of the IPE model.