A BEME systematic review of the effects of interprofessional education: BEME Guide No. 39

Abstract

Background: Interprofessional education (IPE) aims to bring together different professionals to learn with, from and about one another in order to collaborate more effectively in the delivery of safe, high quality care for patients/clients. Given its potential for improving collaboration and care delivery, there have been repeated calls for the wider scale implementation of IPE across education and clinical settings. Increasingly, a range of IPE initiatives are being implemented and evaluated which are adding to the growth of evidence for this form of education. Aim:The overall aim of this review is to update a previous BEME review published in 2007. In doing so, this update sought to synthesise the evolving nature of the IPE evidence.Methods: Medline, CINAHL, BEI and ASSIA were searched from May 2005 to June 2014. Also, journal hand searches were undertaken. All potential abstracts and papers were screened by pairs of reviewers to determine inclusion. All included papers were assessed for methodological quality and those deemed as 'high quality' were included. The presageprocess-product (3P) model and a modified Kirkpatrick model were employed to analyse and synthesise the included studies.Results: Twenty-five new IPE studies were included in this update. These studies were added to the 21 studies from the previous review to form a complete data set of 46 high quality IPE studies. In relation to the 3P model, overall the updated review found that most of the presage and process factors identified from the previous review were further supported in the newer studies. In regards to the products (outcomes) reported, the results from this review continue to show far more positive than neutral or mixed outcomes reported in the included studies. Based on the modified Kirkpatrick model, the included studies suggest that learners respond well to IPE, their attitudes and perceptions of one another improve, and they report increases in collaborative knowledge and skills. There is more limited, but growing, evidence related to changes in behaviour, organisational practice and benefits to patients/clients. Conclusions:This updated review found that key context (presage) and process factors reported in the previous review continue to have resonance on the delivery of IPE. In addition, the newer studies have provided further evidence for the effects on IPE related to a number of different outcomes. Based on these conclusions, a series of key implications for the development of IPE are offered.

Toward interprofessional learning and education: Mapping common outcomes for prequalifying healthcare professional programs in the United Kingdom

“…draw generalizable inferences about the key elements of IPE and its effectiveness" (Reeves et al 2013, p. 2), there is growing evidence of positive changes in learners' attitudes toward others and collaborative skills (Reeves et al 2016) and smaller studies suggest that IPE may benefit patient care (Laurant et al 2010).…”

Evaluation of a Unique Interprofessional Education Program Involving Medical and Pharmacy Students

“…4 The majority of published IPE studies in two systematic reviews published by Reeves and colleagues have reported positive outcomes, which may relate to learner reactions, perceptions, attitudes, knowledge, skills, behavioral change, organizational practice, and in some cases, even improved patient outcomes. 5,6 Many types of IPE activities have been described, including meet-and-greet opportunities, didactic instruction, joint courses, case studies, web-based discussions, community service learning, clinical placements, studentled clinics, interaction with simulated or standardized patients, team-based case conferences, in-home medication reviews, and joint Objective Structured Clinical Examinations. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] Olson and Bialorcerkowski's systematic review of various interprofessional activities suggested that the outcomes of these events may be dependent upon the context in which they are delivered.…”

The HCAHPS Survey as a Potential Tool for Measuring Organizational Interprofessional Competency at American Hospitals Nationwide: A Content Analysis Study of Concept Validity

“…As several recent systematic reviews demonstrate, there is indeed a causal relationship between interprofessionalism and non-clinical outcomes, such as improved patient care management infrastructures, increased collaborative team behavior, and higher patient satisfaction with care (Reeves, Perrier, Goldman, Freeth, & Zwarenstein, 2013;Reeves et al, 2008;Zwarenstein, Goldman, & Reeves, 2009), as well as better educational outcomes for healthcare professionals and improved attitudes and perceptions of interprofessional education (Lapkin, Levett-Jones, & Gilligan, 2011;Reeves et al, 2016). While many studies have devised measures of interprofessionalism at the individual or team level (Archibald, Trumpower, & MacDonald, 2014;Chiu, 2014;Dominguez, Fike, MacLaughlin, & Zorek, 2015;Dougherty, 2016;Dow, DiazGranados, Mazmanian, & Retchin, 2014;Fike et al, 2013;Godley & Russell-Mayhew, 2010;Tilden, Eckstrom, & Dieckmann, 2016;Zabar et al, 2016;Zorek et al, 2016), there is no validated quantitative measure of interprofessionalism at the organizational level that is rooted in interprofessional competencies (IPC).…”