RESUMO
PROBLEM ADDRESSED: The new family health teams (FHTs) in Ontario were designed to enable interprofessional collaborative practice in primary care; however, many health professionals have not been trained in an interprofessional environment. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To provide health professional learners with an interprofessional practice experience in primary care that models teamwork and collaborative practice skills. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The 2 academic teaching units of the FHT at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont, employ 6 types of health professionals and provide learning environments for family medicine residents and students in a variety of health care professions. Learners engage in formal interprofessional education activities and mixed professional and learner clinical consultations. They are immersed in an established interprofessional practice environment, where all team members are valued and contribute collaboratively to patient care and clinic administration. Other contributors to the success of the program include the physical layout of the clinics, the electronic medical record communications system, and support from leadership for the additional clinical time commitment of delivering interprofessional education. CONCLUSION: This academic FHT has developed a program of interprofessional education based partly on planned activities and logistic enablers, and largely on immersing learners in a culture of long-standing interprofessional collaboration.
Assuntos
Educação Baseada em Competências/métodos , Educação Profissionalizante/métodos , Medicina de Família e Comunidade/educação , Relações Interprofissionais , Canadá , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: As medical education expands into distant settings, challenges in providing faculty development to busy clinical teachers increase-especially for those who have difficulty accessing sessions offered at academic centers. DESCRIPTION: Sixty-five clinical teachers participated in six small-group workshops, using a printed module on the topic of delivering feedback. The modules included teaching-learning "cases," tools, and a summary of medical literature. The group facilitator did not require expertise in delivering feedback. Surveys inquired about impact immediately after the session and at 3 months. EVALUATION: Analysis confirmed that participants found the workshop format valuable, and the majority committed to making changes in their approaches to providing feedback. At follow-up, most participants reported that planned changes had been implemented. CONCLUSIONS: A low-tech approach to faculty development, using facilitated small-group discussion of a specially prepared educational module, is feasible for any site and can enhance teaching approaches in both urban and rural practice settings.
