Interprofessional education for healthcare professionals. A BEME realist review of what works, why, for whom and in what circumstances in undergraduate health sciences education: BEME Guide No. 83.

AIM: To provide an evidence-informed program theory (PT) for Interprofessional Education (IPE) that adds to the knowledge base of how IPE in undergraduate health sciences education works. METHODS: We undertook a realist review of the literature and synthesis of the evidence combined with stakeholder experience. Our initial program theory (IPT), built around development, delivery and evaluation of IPE interventions, was tested and refined following an in-depth search of the literature and consultation with stakeholders. The literature (2010-2022) was selected based on the realist criteria of relevance and rigor, as well as on conceptual richness of the studies. RESULTS: Our PT is built upon 124 CMOs (Context of IPE interventions, Mechanisms that fired within that context, and IPE Outcomes), from 58 studies. Our PT comprises an array of elements found in the Context, including traits and behavioral displays of students and facilitators, and discusses four Mechanisms (feeling responsible, feeling enthusiastic/excited, feeling safe to take risks, and feeling ready), which are likely to lead to outcomes related to the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (sub)competencies. DISCUSSION: Results were linked to learning theories to further build our understanding. The PT can serve as a guide for the development, delivery, and evaluation of IPE interventions.

Interprofessional learning in a student-run dental clinic: The effect on attitudes of students in oral healthcare.

The purpose of this study was to gain insight into change in attitudes held by students in oral healthcare about interprofessional learning and collaboration after one year of work in a student-run dental clinic (SRDC). Third- and fourth-year bachelor of dental hygiene students (n = 221) and first- and second-year master of dentistry students (n = 203) participated in baseline and follow-up measurements and completed 570 questionnaires. The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) was used to measure changes in attitudes toward Interprofessional Education (IPE) during participation in the SRDC. To validate the questionnaire for the setting, professional groups, and wording of RIPLS, we performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Two modified subscales remained: "Teamwork & Collaboration" and "Negative Professional Identity." Mixed linear models were used to assess relationships between students' attitudes toward IPE and participation in the SRDC. Overall, the students had positive attitudes toward IPE. At baseline, the attitudes of the dental hygiene and dentistry students were almost equally positive. After one year, dental hygiene students demonstrated a significantly more positive attitude toward collaborative learning and teamwork than the dentistry students. Further research should investigate whether the positive attitudes impact behavior in professional practice.

Perceptions of interprofessional collaboration in education of dentists and dental hygienists and the impact on dental practice in the Netherlands: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the perceptions of dentists and dental hygienists regarding their own and each other's roles in interprofessional collaboration following a clinical interprofessional educational programme (CIEP) as part of their graduate programme at Radboud university medical center (Radboudumc) and HAN University of Applied Sciences (HAN UAS), Nijmegen, the Netherlands, respectively. Perceptions were obtained at the end of their study (2014) and two years after their graduation (2016). METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using a questionnaire with open-ended questions. Sixty-two dentists and thirty-eight dental hygienists were invited. Theory-based analyses were applied in combination with principles of Grounded Theory to analyse and synthesise the collected data from the open-ended questions. RESULTS: At baseline, 100% responded. At follow-up, thirty-two dentists (51.6%) and twenty-six dental hygienists (68.4%) responded; twenty-seven dentists (43.5%) and eighteen dental hygienists (47.4%) were included. Many similarities were found between baseline and follow-up regarding perceptions of each other's expertise and responsibility, learning from and with each other, and the behaviour of students and the "novice" professionals in interprofessional collaboration. Both dentists and dental hygienists experienced the CIEP as useful for interprofessional collaboration. The "novice" dentists and dental hygienists indicated that in dental practices interprofessional collaboration was less common. CONCLUSION: The CIEP resulted in more understanding amongst dentists and dental hygienists with regard to interprofessional roles, but in practice the "novice" dentists and dental hygienists face difficulties in applying the interprofessional roles.