the health care team challenge: developing an ... · the health care team challenge: developing an...
TRANSCRIPT
The health care team challenge: Developing an international interprofessionaleducation research collaboration
Christie Newton, Lesley Bainbridge, Valerie Ball, Karyn Baum, PeterBontje, Rosalie A. Boyce, Monica Moran, Barbara Richardson, Yumi Tamura,Don Uden, Susan J. Wagner, Victoria Wood
PII: S0260-6917(14)00242-1DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.07.010Reference: YNEDT 2769
To appear in: Nurse Education Today
Received date: 27 February 2014Revised date: 2 July 2014Accepted date: 5 July 2014
Please cite this article as: Newton, Christie, Bainbridge, Lesley, Ball, Valerie, Baum,Karyn, Bontje, Peter, Boyce, Rosalie A., Moran, Monica, Richardson, Barbara, Tamura,Yumi, Uden, Don, Wagner, Susan J., Wood, Victoria, The health care team challenge:Developing an international interprofessional education research collaboration, Nurse Ed-ucation Today (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.07.010
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proofbefore it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production processerrors may be discovered which could a!ect the content, and all legal disclaimers thatapply to the journal pertain.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
1
THE HEALTH CARE TEAM CHALLENGE: DEVELOPING AN
INTERNATIONAL INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
RESEARCH COLLABORATION
Christie Newton, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Family Practice, Director of Continuing Professional Development and Community Partnerships, Director Division of Professional Development, College of Health Disciplines, 400-2194 Health Sciences Mall, University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z3 Phone: 604-822-1712 Fax: 604-822-2495
Lesley Bainbridge, PhD, Director, Interprofessional Education, Faculty of Medicine, Associate Principal in the College of Health Disciplines, 400-2194 Health Sciences Mall, University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z3 Phone: 604-822-1712 Fax: 604-822-2495 [email protected]
Valerie Ball*, BComm, Research Coordinator, College of Health Disciplines, 400-2194 Health Sciences Mall, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z3 Phone: 604-827-3386 Fax: 604-822-2495 [email protected]
Karyn Baum, MD, Professor of Medicine, Associate Chair of Clinical Quality, Department of Medicine, Medical Director, Utilization Review, University of Minnesota, Division of General Internal Medicine,420 Delaware Street, SE, MMC 284, Minneapolis, MN 55455, Phone: 612-625-6370 [email protected]
Peter Bontje, Associate Professor, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo. Faculty of Health Sciences, Div. of Occupational Therapy, Graduate School of Human Health Sciences, Dept. of Occupational Therapy, 7-2-10 Higashiogu Arakawa-ku Tokyo 116-8551 JAPAN Phone: +81-(0)3-3819-7349 [email protected]
Rosalie A. Boyce, Associate Professor, Centre for Rural & Remote Health, University of Southern Queensland and School of Pharmacy, University of Queensland, P.O. Box 4229, St. Lucia South, Queensland 4067, [email protected]
Monica Moran, DSocSc, MPhil(OT), Associate Professor, Central Queensland University School of Health & Human Services, Building 6/2.39 Bruce Highway,Rockhampton,QLD 4702 Phone: +61 7 4923 2234, [email protected],
Barbara Richardson, Director of Interprofessional Education and Research Washington State University. Division of Health Sciences, P.O. Box 1495, Spokane, WA 99210-1495 Phone: 509-324-7230, [email protected]
Yumi Tamura, Professor, Graduate School Health Care Sciences, Jikei Institute, 1-2-8 Miyhara, Yodogawa-ku Osaka, 532-0003 Japan. (April 2014: Professor,The Japanese Red Cross College of Nursing, Disaster Nursing Global Leadership Degree Program, 4-1-3 Hiroo,Shibuya-ku,Tokyo 150-0012, Japan.) Phone: +81(0)6-6150-1336, [email protected]
Don Uden, Professor, Department of Pharmaceutical Care and Health Systems, University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy. 7-159 Weaver-Densford Hall, 308 Harvard St. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 Phone: 612-624-9624, [email protected]
Susan J. Wagner, Senior Coordinator of Clinical Education, Director of Continuing Education, Senior Lecturer, Department of Speech-Language Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto. Department of Speech-Language Pathology, #160 – 500 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1V7, Phone: 416-978-5929, [email protected]
Victoria Wood, Project Manager, College of Health Disciplines, University of British Columbia. 400-2194 Health Sciences Mall, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z3 Phone: 604-822-8693 Fax: 604-822-2495
Word count 2528 Acknowledgements: None Funding/Support: CIHR Meetings and Planning Grant, University of British Columbia Other Disclosures: None Ethical Approval: Not applicable Disclaimer: None
*Corresponding Author
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
2
THE HEALTH CARE TEAM CHALLENGETM: DEVELOPING AN
INTERNATIONAL INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
RESEARCH COLLABORATION
Interprofessional education (IPE) to improve and increase interprofessional
collaborative practice (IPC) has been documented for over 50 years in Canada, but it is
within the last 15 years that it has gained attention in research, education and practice
contexts. IPE is defined as two or more professions that learn with from and about each
other to improve collaboration and the quality of care (Caipe 2002). Early drivers for a
renewed interest in IPE and IPC derive from an emerging interest in new health service
delivery models such as integrated care clinics and primary health care and IPE and
IPC have taken centre stage nationally and globally. Research evidence is emerging
(Baker, 2010) which demonstrates the value of IPC in areas such as harm reduction,
reduced length of stay, sustainable health outcomes, and staff recruitment and
retention. Most education programs are starting to embed IPE in their entry-level
curricula and increasing attention to continuing professional develop is emerging.
The barriers and curricular challenges remain. Entry-level curricula are crammed
and lack the flexibility and nimbleness required to identify common learning times;
student clinical placements across the professions are not aligned and make it difficult
to locate interprofessional groups of students in any given practice setting; faculty and
preceptor development for interprofessional teaching is rarely highlighted; student value
of IPE is weakened when IPE is not mainstreamed in curricula; human, financial and
space resources are stretched and IPE often falls to the lower priority levels.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
3
Other documented barriers include professional regulatory requirements, non-existent
institutional policies that allow sharing of course credits across programs or universities,
lack of senior management/ administrative commitment, poor understanding of other
professions and separate professional languages (Moran et al, 2007).
In reality we have a conundrum. In response to the emerging evidence that
collaborative practice among health care providers does improve quality of care and
patient outcomes, IPE is viewed as an essential educational process aimed at
developing interprofessional collaborative practice capabilities (Barr and Ross, 2006;
Baker, 2010). Government agencies, academic accrediting councils, health professions
organizations and the literature stress the need for IPE (Baker, 2010), yet evidenced-
based suggestions as to how this should be accomplished are only slowly emerging.
Innovative interprofessional learning opportunities are needed to ensure that students
actively participate (Moran et al, 2007). Yet currently the literature lacks strategies that
foster collaborative learning among professions that are versatile and easy to implement
locally and internationally.
One such innovative IPE program aimed at overcoming the many barriers to IPE
and initiated at The University of British Columbia, Canada, over 20 years ago, and
adapted for use internationally (Boyce et al, 2009) is the Health Care Team ChallengeTM
(HCTCTM). In June 2011, faculty members from six universities in four countries who
each host an annual HCTCTM event (in Australia HFTCTM), convened to develop a
collaborative research program. Funded by the Canadian Institute of Health Research
through its ‘Meetings, Planning and Dissemination Grant’ program, the short-term goal
of the workshop was to refine the HCTCTM model through a process of reviewing
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
4
applicable learning theories and interprofessional literature; identifying key
characteristics of a HCTCTM using a modified Delphi process; and examining the
strengths, weaknesses or challenges, opportunities, and threats associated with
embedding a HCTCTM in the curricula of health professional programs. The group came
together as the founding participants of an International Network of Health Care Team
Challenges. The long-term aim of the Network is to demonstrate that students who
participate in a HCTCTM are (a) more likely to engage in learning about collaborative
practice and (b) more likely through this exposure to become effective collaborative
practitioners, thus contributing to improvements in health care delivery and patient/client
outcomes. This paper describes the key elements, operational strategies, strengths,
challenges and potential variations of the HCTCTM model as defined by the International
Network of Health Care Team Challenges. It is hoped that through collaborative
international research of the HCTCTM, promotion of curricular and cultural change for
implementing IPE programs will occur that encourages students to engage in
collaborative patient/client-centred practice in academic institutions world-wide.
The HCTC TM Model
The HCTCTM is an IP learning activity designed to provide pre-professional or pre-
licensure level health and human services students with an opportunity to engage in
simulated patient/client-centered collaborative practice. As a result, participants learn
about, from and with one another, while also practicing skills and acquiring knowledge
and attitudes that will contribute to their ability to be “workforce ready” health care
professionals.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
5
The learning objectives align with the six competency domains of the Canadian
National Interprofessional Education Competency Framework (CIHC, 2010) which were
used to inform the development of interprofessional education accreditation standards
in both Canada (AIPHE, 2012) and the USA (Zorek, and Raehl, 2013). The competency
domains are: 1. patient/client centeredness, 2. collaborative communication, 3. role
understanding, 4. team functioning, 5. shared leadership and collaborative decision
making and 6. conflict resolution.
The HCTCTM is easily adaptable for a variety of health professions’ programs and is
responsive to local resources and contexts. Students from many health professions may
collaborate in a HCTCTM, as long as the patient/client scenario is relevant to all
participants and represents a credible health care situation. Cases may vary in
complexity, be placed in various contextual settings and include elements of safety and
quality improvement. Emphasis may be placed on variables such as cultural
components of health, public health concerns, emergency preparedness, ethical
dilemmas or end-of-life issues.
Using a modified Delphi technique, the International Network of Health Care Team
Challenges participants identified and recommended inclusion of the key characteristics
and operational considerations for every HCTCTM.
Insert Table 1
The HCTCTM Process
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
6
The HCTCTM is a clinical cased-based challenge between two or more
interprofessional teams of students representing at least two different health and social
service professions, however 4 to 8 different professions are recommended. Student
participants receive the initial patient / client scenario at least one week in advance of
the live learning activity. Teams are instructed to work collaboratively to formulate a
patient / client-centered plan of care. On the day of the HCTCTM, the teams present their
plan in front of a live audience of faculty, peers and community members. Then teams
are presented with additional information relevant to the case, challenging each team to
adjust its management plan to incorporate the new information. Additionally, teams are
asked to respond to “team process questions” such as, “While preparing your
responses how did your team deal with conflicts?” Teams are assessed by the
audience, an IP panel of judges that may include the patient /client or family member,
faculty, administrators, practicing community-based professional and / or care team.
Teams are judged on both the quality of the management plan and the level of
collaboration. All team participants receive recognition for their involvement.
Case Example
A female soldier is seriously injured in a Middle eastern conflict. She requires immediate
emergency attention, including transport to a military hospital in Germany.
New information presented during live presentation:
a) The soldier is stabilized and made ready for transfer home to her home city.
b) The soldier is transferred from acute care to a rehabilitation centre with the goal
of discharge home.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
7
c) She is prepared for discharge and returned home to her community with disability
support.
This case example can be adapted to include any number or type of health profession
or context such as vulnerable populations or rural health care.
Outcome Measures:
An ongoing challenge for the International Network of Health Care Team Challenges
is assessment of changes in knowledge, skills, and attitudes resulting from participation
in a HCTCTM. Until the development of the Network, assessment and evaluation was
completed to different degrees, using different tools at each institution.
At the University of British Columbia the participants and audience complete informal
online surveys to identify changes in interprofessional knowledge and attitudes. These
pre- and post- surveys have consistently demonstrated improved knowledge of and
attitudes towards collaborative practice.
In Australia team participants complete pre and post assessment that measures
changes in beliefs, behaviours and attitudes related to interprofessional socialization.
Data collected over 7 years indicate sustained behaviour changes, increased
confidence and increased IPE understanding and proficiency.
At Washington State University, students are assessed pre and post participation to
measure attitudes about teamwork, collaboration, professional identity and roles and
responsibilities. Findings indicated that shared learning with other health care students
would help them communicate better, that team-working skills are essential for all health
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
8
care students to learn and that patients would ultimately benefit if health care students
worked together to solve patient problems and that learning with other students would
help them become a more effective member of a health care team. (Richardson et al,
2012):
As part of the research agenda, the International Network of Health Care Team
Challenges is working to identify valid and reliable tools that can be used across
settings. Collecting data from participants around the world in different health care
contexts will provide further insights into the value of the HCTCTM as an IPE model.
Figure 1 depicts how the key characteristics play out for the students during an actual
HCTCTM activity.
Insert Figure 1
Strengths and Challenges of the HCTCTM Model and Process
After agreeing on the key characteristics (see Table 1), the International Network of
Health Care Team Challenges evaluated the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats – a SWOT analysis - inherent in the HCTCTM model and process.
Insert Table 2
A major strength of the model is its sound theoretical framework. From an
educational theory perspective, the HCTCTM directly aligns with the World Health
Organization’s principles of effective interprofessional education as the model is
practice/problem-based and patient / client-focused (Baker, 2010). As there is currently
no universally accepted IPE theoretical framework, the HCTCTM is supported by
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
9
elements of two established educational theories - experiential learning theory provides
structure for the IP learning activity and social learning theory informs group process
(Barr and Ross, 2006; Baker, 2010).
Additional strengths lie in the HCTCTM model’s versatility. Flexibility is achieved
through potential for involvement from multiple professions, adjustable depth of clinical
learning and extracurricular scheduling. Faculty members can easily develop the case
to involve multiple health and human service professions, focusing on relevant clinical
content or emphasizing particular aspects of team process.
One subtype of this IPE model is the CLARION Case Competition which developed
separately from the UBC HCTCTM. It further demonstrates the model’s versatility. This
competition, while interprofessional, extracurricular, and experiential, is focused more
upon patient safety and quality improvement than its peers. Teams perform a root
cause analysis of a clinical scenario and are judged not only for team process and
clinical case management, but also on fiscal responsibility and administrative
efficiencies (further information is available at
http://www.chip.umn.edu/clarion/casecomp/).
Another strength of the HCTCTM lies in its iterative development and implementation
process. Over the years since initial implementation, the HCTCTM has evolved and
matured with feedback from student and audience participants, and critical evaluation of
past successes and limitations. The HCTCTM format supports continuous quality
improvement. The annual Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles have facilitated a gradual
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
10
integration of IPE into the curricula of many participating professions and evolution of
faculty collaborations through the promotion of an interprofessional culture.
Finally, the ongoing HCTCTM success relies on strong administrative support and
IPE champion faculty representatives from each of the participating programs. Faculty
designs the case or enlists an actual patient /client, advertise the session, recruit
students and judges. The ongoing dedication of faculty is enhanced by support from
deans, chairs and directors that encourage faculty participation on the HCTC planning
committee and release students from classroom obligations to attend the learning
activity.
The main challenge of the HCTCTM pertains to it being a simulated learning
opportunity that does not build in specific transfers to and mastery of collaborative
competence in practice situations. Furthermore, outcome data of the HCTCTM is
fledgling at best. Other weaknesses are that the HCTCTM does not document “best
practice”, but rather the best among the different teams. While its extracurricular status
serves as strength in flexibility of implementation; as a non-compulsory part of the
curriculum, the HCTCTM may not be perceived as scholarly work and therefore lack
institutional support.
Future Directions
Based on the inventory of strengths and challenges, the Network devised the
following plans to further develop the HCTCTM as an IPE model and to address its
weaknesses. Process-wise, intra- or extra-curricular live sessions and virtual
synchronous or asynchronous team challenges represent implementation strategies for
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
11
the HCTCTM that would facilitate wider dissemination, both locally and internationally.
The patient/client/family role is also one that could be expanded through consistent
inclusion of simulated or real individual(s) to ensure a primary focus in this area. To
further address the need for transferable data, in addition to common assessment tools,
Network participants are developing common patient / client scenarios. Research
regarding the roles of students as they engage in collaboration and the impact of
cultural variables is also being pursued. The HCTCTM model has started to expand into
graduate education, for example in Japan and the USA. Future plans include adapting
the IPE model for use with practicing providers of team-based health care and
embedding it into the international interprofessional education conference: All Together
Better Health.
Last but not least, it is hoped that the outline of the HCTCTM model and process in this
paper may inspire readers to develop HCTCTM that fit their local needs and to become
part of the international Network.
Conclusion
Despite challenges, it is possible to embed IPE into existing health and human
service curricula. The process may be enhanced by implementing IPE learning activities
such as the HCTCTM that focus on team-building skills and reinforce professional role
development. Due to limited research, effectiveness of the HCTCTM cannot be
generalized to all settings. The Canadian, U.S.A., Japanese and Australian experiences
suggest that the HCTCTM is a versatile IPE model that successfully introduces IP core
competencies within existing curricula, and ensures that health profession students
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
12
have an opportunity to learn and practice collaboratively in a safe and structured
environment. The International Network of Health Care Team Challenges will continue
to collaborate to further develop, research, and disseminate this unique IPE model.
References:
Accreditation of Interprofessional Health Education (AIPHE), 2012. http://www.cihc.ca/files/aiphe/resources/AIPHE%20Principles%20and%20Practices%20Guide%20-%20v.2%20EN.pdf
Baker, P.G., 2010. Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice. World health Organization, http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:233239
Barr, H., Ross, F., 2006. Mainstreaming interprofessional education in the United Kingdom: A position paper. Journal of Interprofessional Care 20 (2), 96–104.
Boyce, R.A., Moran, M., Nissen, L., Chenery, H., Brooks, P., 2009. Interprofessional education in health sciences: Why a health care team challenge. Medical Journal of Australia 190 (8), 433-436.
Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC), 2010. A National Interprofessional Competency Framework, http://www.cihc.ca/files/CIHC_IPCompetencies_Feb1210.pdf
Centre for Advancement of Interprofessional Education (CAIPE), 2002. Defining IPE, http://www.caipe.org.uk/about-us/defining-ipe/
Moran, M., Boyce, R., O'Neill, K., Bainbridge, L., Newton, C., 2007. The Health Care Team Challenge: Extra-curricula engagement in inter-professional education. Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-disciplinary Journal 8 (3), 47-53.
Richardson, B., Gersh, M., Potter, N., 2012. Health Care Team Challenge: A Versatile Model for Interprofessional Education. MedEdPORTAL, www.mededportal.org/publication/9287
Zorek, J., Raehl, C., 2013. Interprofession education accreditation standards in the USA: A comparative analysis. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 27 (2), 123-130.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
13
Key Words
interprofessional education; interprofessional simulation; case-based education;
interdisciplinary health professional education; international medical education.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
14
Figure 1
1. Student teams receive a case and are assigned a task or a goal –
assessment criteria is communicated to students at this time
2. Student teams work together to create a tangible product based on the
assigned task or goal for the case
3. During the live learning activity, student teams must respond to new
information, such as case twists or questions from the audience. At the
end of the live session, student teams produce a second tangible product
such as an interprofessional care plan, and are asked to respond to
process questions regarding their teamwork
4. Student teams are assessed on the process and/or the product by judges
and audience
5. Student teams receive feedback
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
15
Table 1. Key Characteristics and Operational Considerations of the HCTC TM
Key Characteristics Operational Considerations
Facility to be
integrated into curricula
When possible this learning activity should be part of a larger
interprofessional curriculum that engages students and is
integrated within their uniprofessional program.
At least two teams Having more than one team involved supports the principle of a
challenge, which is supported by social learning theory. The
overall number of teams involved will be influenced by available
resources. There is no maximum number of teams that can be
involved.
Minimum of two
professions on each
team
Based on the definition of interprofessional education, IPE
involves two or more professions. Group theory suggests six –
eight people per team are ideal for small group learning (Johnson
& Johnson, 1991). Team composition should be authentic, based
on how a team would be composed in a “real” practice setting.
Choice for students
to participate as a team
member
While students may be invited to participate as a team
member, they should not be required to do so.
Transparent
recruitment of team
members
As the learning activity becomes more popular, more students
than can be accommodated may volunteer to participate as a team
member. Organizers should have a transparent process for
deciding which students will be able to participate on a team.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
16
Audience
participation
The challenge should take place in front of an audience.
Students may be required to attend as an audience member as
part of an interprofessional or uniprofessional class activity or as
an elective. Observation is considered to be exposure to an
interprofessional learning activity. Academic and clinical faculty
may also be part of the audience along with other stakeholders, as
appropriate.
Support for
education/learning
Teams should have access to support for both content and
process. This may be from: faculty mentors, practitioners, process
resources, content resources, consumers (patient/client,
community organizations, health care organizations) and on-line
resources.
Recognition for
faculty
Ongoing support from dedicated faculty is necessary for
sustainability of the model; therefore, it is important to recognize
the contributions faculty make. This can take the form of faculty
performance and workload recognition; a certificate/letter and / or
verbal/public acknowledgement.
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
17
Table 1 Continued
Recognition for
students
Ways in which students can be recognized for their
participation include a certificate/letter, scholarships, academic
credit, prizes and / or meeting a required component of their
program (i.e., within an IPE curriculum).
A case with
assigned task(s)
This case-based learning activity should utilize cases at an
appropriate level of complexity based on theories of team
development, the level of the learners and the learning objectives.
The content of the case should not be so complex that it distracts
from the interprofessional process. The case should be authentic,
grounded in reality. It is also important that the case be distributed
to participants prior to the learning activity. Participants should be
asked to complete a task associated with the case (e.g., develop
an interprofessional care or management plan).
An interprofessional
team that is developed
over time
Providing the case prior to the session enables students to
develop as a team. This can be done face-to-face, virtually,
synchronously and / or asynchronously.
Real-time team
response to new
information
During the learning activity, teams should be presented with
new information they will process as a team. This could involve
engaging in teamwork or answering questions from the audience
and/or judges; being presented with case plot twist/extensions; or
responding to provocateurs.
A tangible Teams should be required to create a product such as an oral
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
18
product/deliverable that
can be assessed
plan of care; a PowerPoint presentation; a written report; a video or
a role play.
Facility for
assessment of
interprofessional teams
Teams can be assessed on their process and/or the content
(the deliverable). Assessment can come from a panel of judges,
the audience, and/or peer/self-assessment. Judges may include
faculty, consumers, community members, practitioners,
administrators and / or students.
Opportunity for
feedback to teams
Verbal, written or on-line feedback can be provided to teams by
the audience, judges, peers, and/or content and team process
experts.
Program evaluation In order to continuously improve delivery, it is important to
evaluate the model. Formal evaluation may include on-line/written
surveys and/or focus groups. Informal evaluation may include
debriefs and/or student feedback. Faculty may also choose to
evaluate the session as part of a program-wide evaluation
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
19
Table 2. Strengths and Challenges of the HCTCTM Model and Process
Helpful
in Achieving the Learning
Objectives
Harmful
in Achieving the Learning
Objectives
Strengths Challenges / Weaknesses
Internal
Origin
(attributes of
the organization)
Uses interaction and focuses on students
Incorporates core competencies Transforms participants Adapts for local contexts Challenges stereotypes (e.g.,
professional / cultural) Uses flexible goals (e.g., content,
context) Involves an enjoyable student
experience Uses collaborative, case-based
learning Includes all health and human
services professions Involves, patient / client family /
community Fills a gap in traditional learning
environments Involves incentives to participate
(e.g., prizes, credits, certificates) Uses no additional financial
resources Pushes students out of their comfort
zone Offers an extra-curricular
opportunity (e.g., overcomes scheduling issues)
Crosses academic and social spheres (i.e., may include a social element)
Presents an opportunity to develop IPE champions
allows exposure to other professions but may not allow mastery of collaborative practice
Does not oblige audience participation
May not fit some students (public speaking)
Is not embedded if extra-curricular
Involves limited number of participants
Includes challenging logistics Is not perceived as scholarly
work and may lack faculty buy-in
Lacks outcome data Does not address differing
levels of students that may result in varied awareness of professional roles and identity
Does not capture team learning
Does not document “best practices” succinctly
Has self- selection of students
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
20
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
21
Table 2 continued
Opportunities Threats
External
Origin
(attributes of
the environment)
Adapts well to technology Has potential to improve patient
/client care Demonstrates local health
providers collaborative care models
Facilitates health care reform Has potential to change practice Can be package / marketed Develops leadership Builds positive recognition for
programs involved Increases relationships with
community partners Meets accreditation standards Disseminates internationally Creates repository of cases Standardizes processes
Is subject to leadership changes
Needs funding Needs organizational
commitment May lack resources May lack sustainability May need academic rewards
structure Lacks formal recognition for
faculty involvement Is subject to health care reform Requires time from faculty for
case development, mentors May involve proprietary cases May be subject to conflicting
academic schedules of different programs
Is subject to professional silos
ACCE
PTED
MAN
USCR
IPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
22
REVISION: THE HEALTH CARE TEAM CHALLENGETM: DEVELOPING AN
INTERNATIONAL INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION RESEARCH
COLLABORATION – Christie Newton et al.
Research Highlights
A health care team challenge is an effective and versatile model of interprofessional education
The model has been applied internationally and a research collaboration has evolved
The model overcomes many barriers to interprofessional education and collaboration
The international research network is growing and will further develop the model