1 / 21

Impact of Interprofessional Education Workshop on Student Attitudes toward Interprofessional Collaboration

This study analyzes the effects of a workshop on students' attitudes towards interprofessional collaboration in healthcare settings. The research focuses on perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors pre-and post-workshop. Results show a significant impact on attitudes. Recommendations for educators include focusing on specific domains. Conclusion finds the hypothesis unsupported due to research design limitations.

keisha
Download Presentation

Impact of Interprofessional Education Workshop on Student Attitudes toward Interprofessional Collaboration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CA: InterprofessionalEducation9 Juli 2012 http://rossisanusi.wordpress.com

  2. Kenaszchuk, C., Rykhoff, M., Collins, L., McPhail, S., & van Soeren, M. (2011). Positive and null effects of interprofessionaleducation on attitudes toward interprofessionallearning and collaboration. Adv in Health SciEduc. DOI 10.1007/s10459-011-9341-0 IPE  sikapthd IPL & IPC

  3. http://id.images.search.yahoo.com/images/

  4. TelaahPustaka • KebijakanPemerintah Federal & Provinsi Canada: IPE pra-lisensi & IPC pasca-lisensi. • The Health Canada Accreditation on Inter-professional Health Education: integrasi IPE kedalamkurikulumilmu-ilmukesehatan. • Inggeris: IPE wajib.

  5. IPE dapatmemfasilitasiperubahansikapmahasiswadenganmengkoreksi stereotyping negatifdanmenunjukkanmanfaat IPC • Bentuk IPE pra-lisensi: orientasi IP, penempatanpraktekklinik, simulasi IP, lokakarya IP, & kurikulum IP penuh. • Tidakada yang lebihunggul; beragambentuk IPE  manfaat >> • Kemajuanpengetahuantentangbagaimanamengembangkan IPE bertambahtidakdiimbangidenganupayaevaluasi IPE.

  6. TujuanPenelitian • Menganalisispengaruhlokakarya (LK) terhadapsikapmahasiswatentang IPC. Tujuan LK: • mengajarkanmahasiswatanggungjawabprofesinyadanprofesi lain dalamupayakesehatanpasien • mendorongmahasiswamempraktekkankomunikasi IP efektif • memperbaikisikapmahasiswaterhadap IPC.

  7. Metoda • Kelompokintervensi: mahasiswapeserta LK IPE Kelompokkontrol: mahasiswa non-peserta LK IPE • KeduanyamengisialatukurPersepsi & Sikap IP sampai 1 blnsebelum & 1 blnsesudah LK dikelas (dgnasistenpeneliti) ataumelalui internet (waktuditentukansendiri): a. the IPE Perceptions Scale (IEPS) b. the Univ of West England quest (UWE)

  8. Subyekpenelitian: mahasiswatahunterakhir 10 program (N = 900) – 350 Kelintervensi & 550 KelKontrol. • Keikutsertaandlm LK diwajibkandibbp program. Mhsdiberitahubbpbulansebelumnyaapakahwajib/tidakwajibikutserta LK. • Pendaftaransukareladikelasolehasistenpenelitibbpbulansebelum LK. • Ada 131 peserta LK dan 68 non-pesertaygmengisiinstrumensurvei - 105 peserta (30%) and 62 non-peserta (11%) menjawab paling sedikitseparuhpertanyaan survey, ygdapatdigunakanutkanalisisstatistik.

  9. Lokakarya IPE • PokJa IPE: 24 dosen - 10 program dari 3 fakultasdarisuatuuniversitasbesardi Toronto, Canada: 1. 8 program dariFakIlmu-IlmuKesehatan: ProDi S1 KeperawatandanProDi Diploma KeperawatanPraktis, Paramedik, AsistenTerapiOkupasi , AsistenFisioterapi, TeknisiFarmasi, Pekarya, PelayananPemakaman, & PAUD. 2. Fak Hospitality, Rekreasi, & Pariwisata 3. FakSosial & PelayananMasyarakat.

  10. Acara 3 jam: a. pembicaratamu – menekanpentingnya IPE & EPC, danmenunjukkanhasilpenelitian. b. presentasistudikasus + main peran – riwayatupayakesehatandariseorangwanitausilaygmengalamicederajatuhdirumahnyamulaidari UGD, rehab, self-care, & end-of-life/ family-centered care. c. diskusikelompok (90 menit) d. tanya-jawab & kesimpulan

  11. V. TidakTerikat (8): Revised IEPS: 5-pilihan (SS – STS) • Competency & Autonomy (5 item) • Perceived Need for Cooperation (2 item) • Perceived Actual Cooperation (5 item) UWE • Self-assesment Communication & Team-work (9 item, 4-pilihan) 5 – 7: Sikap/persepsi (5-pilihan): IPL (9 item), IP Interaction (9 item) & IP Interrelationships (8 item)

  12. The shared leadership/physician centrality subscaledari Attitudes Toward Health Care Teams Scale (ATHCTS) - 5 item, 6-point (SS - STS) Nilai total pasca-LK 8 variabelterikat – Nilaitinggimewakilijawabankualitatiflebihbaik/yang diingini.

  13. V. Bebas • Menghadiri LK (dikotomi) • Minatthd IPE (T, S, R) • Minatikut LK (T, S, R) • Tahunajaran (kedua, keempat & post-grad diploma). • Pengalamanupayakesehatansebelumnya • Umur & gender

  14. Analisis Data Pengolahan: • DeksripsiKelintervensi & Kelkontrol Tabel 1 • OLS (Ordinary Least Squares) multiple regression  Tabel 2 Hasil:Selisih Mean bermakna • KelIntervensi > KelKontrol : UWE sikapthd IPL interprofessional learning 1.8 (t = 2.13, P = 0.03) • KelKontrol > KelIntervensi: UWE persepsi IP interaction – 2.2 (t = -2.95, P = 0.004).

  15. Kesimpulan & Rekomendasi LK pendekIPE mempengaruhi IPA berikut: • perceived competency and autonomy of others • perceived need for cooperation • self-assessed communication and teamwork • attitudes toward IP learning. Rekomendasi: Pendidikyginginmenggunakanintervensipendek IPE dapatmemusatkanperhatianpada domain2 tsb.

  16. Kesimpulan & Rekomendasi Valid? Kesimpulan: Hipotesis tidak didukung (selisih mean kecil). Penyebab: • Rancangan penelitian tidak kuat. • Kerangka Konsep tidak tepat

  17. Rancangan Penelitian • Pengumpulan data: V Bebas: ada alasan teoretik & emperik V Terikat: V Isi: IEPS sudah beberapa kali dimodifikasi. UWE & The shared leadership/physician centrality subscale perlu dijelaskan V konstruk: perlu pengkajian hipotesis2 triangulasi alat ukur

  18. Pengolahan data: cukup selisih mean kelompok intervensi & kelompok kontrol. Kelompok kontrol diberi intervensi dalam bentuk lain. • Pentafsiran data: a. V Internal: variabel confounding dikontrol dengan kelompok kontrol dan multivriate analysis. Pre-test tidak perlu karena jarak antara intervensi dan post-test singkat. b. V External: Ecological validity kurang karena intervensi dan pengukuran V terikat tidak seperti pada populasi sasaran.

  19. Keterbatasan • Pesertasukarela & non-sukarela  self-selection bias. • Menggunakan Self-reports  common method variance, consistency motif & social desirability. • Tidakdianalisis per kelompokprofesi. 4. Tidakdianalisis per sub-intervensi. 5. Tidakditelitidampakjangkapanjang.

  20. Kerangka Konsep? • Interpofessional Collaboration merupakan masalah Maslah Managment atau Masalah Pendidikan?  perlu kerangka konsep management (Koordinasi, komunikasi, kepemimpinan)

More Related