Coming in from the interprofessional cold in Australia

Abstract

In Australia, implementation of interprofessional education (IPE) has been slow compared with peer countries. One cause is an apparent uncertainty about where and how to situate IPE at policy levels. Without a clear articulation of related needs, vision and purpose, IPE has largely remained isolated from the strategic planning and funding cycles necessary for implementation as "core business" across various sectors, systems and levels. This paper draws on international developments and research to emphasise the need to complement innovative IPE practice with supporting policy, specifically to optimise the quality of future health care delivery. Major forces for change are identified, as well as some residual barriers and possible strategies to bring IPE "in BOOSTING INTERPROFESSIONAL education (IPE) to improve interprofessional practice (IPP) is not a new idea (for preamble on definitions, see Box 1). Evidence of IPE as an explicit area of study stretches back more than three decades (for example, see Harsh, Fewell and Casto 3 ). Gilbert and Bainbridge 4 refer to IPE efforts in Canada from nearly 40 years ago. These are not isolated examples: the World Health Organization (WHO) 5 is often credited with initiating the IPE movement in 1973, claiming that IPE would improve job satisfaction and encourage a more comprehensive and integrated approach to patients' needs. This has been followed up by numerous studies and projects, for example "Learning together to work together for health". 6 Nor is IPE, as suggested by some, 7 easily dismissed as a passing fashion or fad. For example, since 2001, the National Health System (NHS) in the United Kingdom has mandated that IPE be a compulsory and core feature in the training of all health professionals. 8 In What is known about the topic? There has been growing international recognition that health professionals need better preparation and support for effective collaborative practice. This corresponds to the development of a broad evidence base linking interprofessional education with the development of a range of professional competencies associated with effective interprofessional practice (IPP), as well as growing evidence that better IPP will improve health care for a range of conditions. What does this paper add? This paper outlines the lack of interprofessional education (IPE) and IPP practice in Australia and, using Kotter's change model, outlines some possible steps to advance IPE implementation. What are the implications for practitioners?The author suggests the need for policy and funding support for IPE implementation.

Australian Clinician’s Views on Interprofessional Education for Students in the Rural Clinical Setting

“…Interprofessional education (IPE) is seen as one method to enable undergraduate health professionals to learn how to practice effective teamwork [2][3]. Although IPE has been encouraged in countries such as the UK and Canada for some time, it is yet to become a focus for health professional education in Australia [4][5]. This article presents the findings of a study that sought…”

“…Source: [11, p. xiv-xv] Collaboration and teamwork feature prominently nationally and internationally as priorities for healthcare reform; however, it cannot be assumed that they will automatically occur without recourse to appropriate training [2,5]. In the United Kingdom, IPE is incorporated as a core component of education for all health professionals at the undergraduate level [5,12].…”

“…These obstacles include: lack of government and political support to encourage the implementation of IPE, little research available to justify implementation, lack of funding to undertake IPE research, and resistance of public policy toward change [5]. There is an identified need for regulatory bodies, universities, and other education providers to work more closely with clinical agencies to develop models of clinical education that provide interprofessional learning (IPL) experiences for students across a range of health disciplines [15].…”

“…An understanding of different disciplinary practices and values increases interprofessional cultural competence, an identified pre-requisite for collaborative practice [8]. Optimizing use of the different skill sets of each healthcare discipline can enhance collaboration, coordination and quality of care and lead to improved patient health outcomes and safety in a wide range of healthcare contexts [5,9]. More specifically, IPE enhances communication and decreases conflict, miscommunication, and clinical errors [2][3]10].…”

“…In the United Kingdom, IPE is incorporated as a core component of education for all health professionals at the undergraduate level [5,12]. In Australia, IPE has been recommended but not mandated, resulting in a limited and variable uptake in undergraduate health professional curricula [12][13][14].…”