Athletic Trainers' Perceptions and Experiences with Interprofessional Practice

Negotiating challenges in community-based interprofessional education programs

Framing the Future: Exploring Inter-Professional Education and Practice in an Undergraduate Course

Celebrating the Culture of Interprofessional Collaboration in Athletic Training

Mapping Collective Sensemaking in Communication: The Interprofessional Patient Case Review in Acute Care Rounds

Health care systems are increasing their emphasis on interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) as a necessary component to patient care. However, information regarding the challenges athletic trainers (ATs) perceive with respect to participating in IPCP is lacking. To describe collegiate ATs' perceptions of challenges to and resources for participation in IPCP. Qualitative study. College and university. The response rate was 8% (513 ATs [234 men, 278 women, 1 preferred not to disclose sex], years in clinical practice = 10.69 ± 9.33). Responses to survey-based, open-ended questions were collected through Qualtrics. A general inductive qualitative approach was used to analyze data and establish relevant themes and categories for responses. Multianalyst coding and an external auditor confirmed coding saturation and assisted in triangulation. Challenges were reported in the areas of needing a defined IPCP team structure, respect for all involved health care parties, and concerns when continuity of care was compromised. Communication was reported as both a perceived challenge and a resource. Specific resources seen as beneficial to effective participation in IPCP included communication mechanisms such as shared patient health records and educational opportunities with individuals from other health care professions. As ATs become more integrated into IPCP, they need to accurately describe and advocate their roles, understand the roles of others, and be open to the dynamic needs of team-based care. Development of continuing interprofessional education opportunities for all relevant members of the health care team can help to delineate roles more effectively and provide more streamlined care with the goal of improving patient outcomes.

Contemporary health care emphasizes interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP), described as when providers from two or more professions work together to achieve the highest-quality patient care. Historically, athletic trainers have naturally collaborated with physicians, in part due to our defined scope of practice, but more importantly as a benefit to achieving positive patient outcomes. Athletic trainers also collaborate with nurses, physical therapists, physician assistants, and other health care professionals when providing care to physically active patients and populations. Due to the oftentimes continuous contact with patients while engaging these other health care professionals, athletic trainers are well suited to expand their interprofessional collaborations to other disciplines and serve as key stakeholders in the IPCP team. To assist in this expansion of IPCP, there are several professional organizations and a substantial body of literature focusing on effective engagement in IPCP that can serve as resources for athletic training. This commentary will address the background of IPCP and the relevance of the athletic trainer within the interprofessional team, as well as identify resources for additional information.

In Australia, a national approach to accreditation of programs and regulation of health professions was adopted a decade ago. Accreditation standards and regulatory frameworks can drive change and provide support for interprofessional education and collaborative practice. There is a commonly held belief among Australian academics involved in health professional education, that accreditation and practice standards provide system-level support for interprofessional education and interprofessional collaborative practice. Using a purpose-designed analysis framework and scoring scheme, we analyzed standards of accreditation and practice for 29 regulated, self-regulated and member health professions in Australia to determine the extent and accountability of statements related to interprofessional education and interprofessional collaborative practice. Currently, in Australia, there is a fragmented and inconsistent approach to interprofessional education and interprofessional collaboration evident in accreditation and practice standards and, in general, there are more explicit requirements in standards of the regulated health professions. However, overall the concepts of interprofessional education and interprofessional practice are ill-defined and statements lack accountability and/or outcome measures. Our analysis provides a foundation for reform of Australian standards and an approach for analysis of accreditation and practice standards which may be useful in other jurisdictions.

Interprofessional Collaboration Between Audiologists, SLPs

Background: There is currently a resurgence of interest in interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP) and its potential to positively impact health outcomes at both the patient level and population level, healthcare delivery, and health professions education. This resurgence of interest led to the creation of the National Center on Interprofessional Collaborative Practice and Education in October 2012. Methods: This paper describes three intertwined knowledge generation strategies of the National Center on Interprofessional Practice and Education: (1) the development of a Nexus Incubator Network, (2) the undertaking of comparative effectiveness research, and (3) the creation of a National Center Data Repository. Results: As these strategies are implemented over time they will result in the production of empirically grounded knowledge regarding the direction and scope of the impact, if any, of IPECP on well-defined health and healthcare outcomes including the possible improvement of the patient experience of care. Conclusions: Among the motivating factors for the National Center and the three strategies adopted and addressed herein is the need for rigorously produced, scientifically sound evidence regarding IPECP and whether or not it has the capacity to positively affect the patient experience of care, the health of populations, and the per capita cost of healthcare.

Attitudes toward Healthcare Teamwork between Osteopathic Medical Students in an Interprofessional or Intraprofessional Clinical Education Program

Context As required elements of accreditation, interprofessional education (IPE), and interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) are key considerations for athletic training educators, students, and practicing professionals. Objective Despite the emphasis on IPE and IPCP, little information exists regarding which health care professionals athletic trainers should collaborate with outside of physicians. In addition, no study has established which professionals athletic training students should be educated alongside in preparation for future interprofessional collaboration. Design Cross-sectional survey. Setting Clinical practice settings. Patients or Other Participants Stratified sample of 105 athletic trainers across various employment settings. Data Collection and Analysis Participants selected the top 5 health care professionals with whom they currently interact, desire to collaborate, and believe students should be learning to interact with during clinical practice. Participants indicated how much time they spent in collaborative practice and the frequency and method of their interactions. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations, and frequency counts. Results In addition to physicians, participants identified physical therapists, physician assistants, nurses, and nurse practitioners as the primary professionals with whom they interacted in the past 12 months. Participants identified a desire to collaborate with sport and exercise psychologists, physical therapists, nutritionists, physician assistants, and certified or licensed professional counselors. In addition, participants indicated that athletic training students should learn with physical therapists, paramedics or emergency medical technicians (EMTs), physician assistants, nutritionists, and sport and exercise psychologists in preparation for future clinical practice. Regarding time, the majority (64.7%) of participants interact with other health care professionals multiple times a day or week. Conclusions These results are indicative of the need to prepare athletic training students to engage in collaboration with professionals beyond the naturally occurring partnerships with physicians. Educators could use these findings in the development or modification of IPE experiences, and the results may be considered in the development of continuing education opportunities to enhance practicing athletic trainers’ collaborations.

Research focus has transitioned from interprofessional collaborative practice among qualified health practitioners to the involvement of pre-qualifying students in practicing interprofessional education. It is essential to establish outcome measures to enhance the seamless integration of interprofessional education and collaborative practice. The aim of this study was to develop a culturally appropriate quality measure for assessing interprofessional education and collaborative practice for health practitioners and students in Indonesia by performing cross-cultural validation of the collaborative practice assessment tool (CPAT). The consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) standards of psychometric properties were used to guide the study. The evaluation of the psychometric properties was conducted, involving meticulous structural validity evaluation based on a three-step factorial analysis (exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and multi-group confirmatory factor analysis) and measurement invariance. The parameters analyzed were related to the design requirements of a measure (i.e., targeted population, study sample, and size), the internal structure (structural validity, internal consistency, and measurement invariances), and hypotheses testing for construct validity based on a validated conceptual framework. This study involved 266 practitioners and 232 students. The COSMIN standards for general design requirements were fulfilled. Structural validity confirmed the 7-factor of 48-item structure; measurement invariances indicated configural, metric, and scalar invariants in both practitioner and student cohorts. Construct validity was confirmed by meeting the COSMIN requirement, with over 75% of the tested hypotheses accepted. In conclusion, the findings suggest the newly validated Indonesian CPAT has good psychometric properties concerning internal structure (i.e., structural validity, internal consistency, and measurement invariance) and hypotheses testing, and is therefore a quality measure for assessing interprofessional education and collaborative practice with health practitioners and students in Indonesia.

Interprofessional collaboration: changing the future.

To identify, appraise and synthesise current evidence regarding organisation-wide interprofessional practice issues that facilitate or inhibit effective recognition and response to clinical deterioration, using a theoretical rapid response system model. Recognition and response to clinical deterioration, in adult general medical-surgical ward patients, is embedded as routine interprofessional practice in acute healthcare organisations worldwide. The process of care escalation is complex and sometimes involves multiple health professionals from different disciplines with varying levels of expertise. While a theoretical rapid response system model offers a formalised structured approach to escalate patient care, it is unclear how the implementation of this model, or similar, influences rapid response system-wide interprofessional practices to effectively recognise and respond to clinical deterioration. An integrative review. This review was conducted using key words to systematically search four electronic bibliographic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, ProQuest Central, Cochrane Library). Twenty-nine eligible full-text papers were identified. Quality appraisal of methods was performed using recommended guidelines. Study findings were narratively coded, themed and conceptualised in the context of an organisation-wide rapid response system using an interprofessional collaborative practice framework. Five main themes aligned with the four interprofessional collaborative practice competency domains and a learning continuum of professional development: Organisational culture, Role perceptions and professional accountability, Communication of clinical needs, Team-based practices, and Interprofessional learning opportunities in recognising and responding to clinical deterioration. Within these themes, three notable interprofessional practice issues were highlighted: professional reporting hierarchies (inhibiting), critical care outreach services (facilitating) and interprofessional relationships (facilitating). A unique approach for exploring organisation-wide interprofessional practice issues has been presented using an interprofessional collaborative practice framework. Further interpretive organisation-wide research is necessary to develop a more in-depth and meaningful understanding of interprofessional collaborative practice issues that facilitate or inhibit effective recognition and response to clinical deterioration. This review presents a unique system-wide approach for exploring how health professionals interprofessionally collaborate in practice to effectively recognise and respond to clinical deterioration.

Observation of interprofessional collaborative practice in primary care teams: An integrative literature review.