An interaction analysis model to study knowledge construction in interprofessional education: proof of concept

Unravelling underlying processes in intraprofessional workplace learning in residency

BACKGROUND

To deliver high-quality collaborative care, residents need to be trained across the boundaries of their medical specialty (intraprofessional learning). The current literature does not provide insights into the underlying processes that influence intraprofessional learning. The aim of this study was to gain insight into the processes that occur during intraprofessional workplace learning in residency training, by exploring everyday intraprofessional interactions experienced by residents, with the ultimate objective of improving collaborative practice.

METHOD

We conducted a focused ethnography using field observations and in-depth interviews with residents at an academic children's hospital in the Netherlands. In 2022, nine residents from four different medical specialties were shadowed and/or interviewed. In total, >120 hours of observation and 10 interviews were conducted. Data collection and analysis were conducted iteratively and discussed in a research team with diverse perspectives, as well as with a sounding board group of stakeholders.

RESULTS

Residents were involved in numerous intraprofessional interactions as part of their daily work. We identified three themes that shed light on the underlying processes that occur during intraprofessional workplace learning: (1) residents' agency, (2) ingroups and outgroups and (3) communication about intraprofessional collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative practice offers many intraprofessional learning opportunities but does not automatically result in learning from, with and about other specialties to improve intraprofessional collaborative care. Overarching the identified themes, we emphasise the pivotal role of the resident-supervisor dyad in facilitating residents' engagement in the learning opportunities of complex intraprofessional care. Furthermore, we propose that promoting deliberate practice and shared responsibility in collaborative care are crucial to better prepare residents for their roles and responsibilities in delivering high-quality collaborative patient care.

One chance to get it right: improving clinical handovers for better symptom control at the end of life

Poor communication contributes to morbidity and mortality, not only in general medical care but also at the end oflife. This leads to issues relating to symptom control and quality of care. As part of an international project focused on bereaved relatives' perceptions about quality of end-of-life care, we undertook a quality improvement (QI) project in a general hospital in Córdoba city, Argentina.By using two iterative QI cycles, we launched an educational process and introduced a clinical mnemonic tool, I-PASS, during ward handovers. The introduction of the handover tool was intended to improve out-of-hours care.Our clinical outcome measure was ensuring comfort in at least 60% of dying patients, as perceived by family carers, during night shifts in an oncology ward during the project period (March-May 2019). As process-based measures, we selected the proportion of staff completing the I-PASS course (target 60%) and using I-PASS in at least 60% of handovers. Participatory action research was the chosen method.During the study period, 13/16 dying patients were included. We received 23 reports from family carers about the level of patient comfort during the previous night.Sixty-five per cent of healthcare professionals completed the I-PASS training. The percentage of completed handovers increased from 60% in the first Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle to 68% in the second one.The proportion of positive reports about patient comfort increased from 63% (end of the first PDSA cycle) to 87% (last iterative analysis after 3 months). Moreover, positive responses to 'Did doctors and nurses do enough for the patient to be comfortable during the night?' increased from 75% to 100% between the first and the second QI cycle.In conclusion, we achieved the successful introduction and staff training for use of the I-PASS tool. This led to improved perceptions by family carers, about comfort for dying patients.

Divergent and Convergent Attitudes and Views of General Practitioners and Community Pharmacists to Collaboratively Implement Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Australia: A Nationwide Study

Setting up an interprofessional team for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) to improve the quality and safety of antimicrobial use in primary care is essential but challenging. This study aimed to investigate the convergent and divergent attitudes and views of general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs) about AMS implementation and their perceived challenges of collaboration to design a GP–pharmacist collaborative AMS (GPPAS) model. Nationwide surveys of GPs and CPs across Australia were conducted January-October 2019. Chi square statistics and a theoretical framework were used for comparative analyses of quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. In total, 999 participants responded to the surveys with 15.4% (n = 386) response rates for GPs and 30.7% (n = 613) for CPs. GPs and CPs were aware about AMS however their interprofessional perceptions varied to the benefits of AMS programs. CPs indicated that they would need AMS training; significantly higher than GPs (GP vs. CP; 46.4% vs. 76.5%; p < 0.0001). GPs’ use of the Therapeutic Guideline Antibiotic was much higher than CPs (83.2% vs. 45.5%; p < 0.0001). No interprofessional difference was found in the very-limited use of patient information leaflets (p < 0.1162) and point-of-care tests (p < 0.7848). While CPs were more willing (p < 0.0001) to collaborate with GPs, both groups were convergent in views that policies that support GP–CP collaboration are needed to implement GPPAS strategies. GP–pharmacist collaborative group meetings (54.9% vs. 82.5%) and antimicrobial audit (46.1% vs. 86.5%) models were inter-professionally supported to optimise antimicrobial therapy, but an attitudinal divergence was significant (p < 0.001). The challenges towards GP–CP collaboration in AMS were identified by both at personal, logistical and organisational environment level. There are opportunities for GP–CP collaboration to improve AMS in Australian primary care. However, strengthening GP–pharmacy collaborative system structure and practice agreements is a priority to improve interprofessional trust, competencies, and communications for AMS and to establish a GPPAS model in future.