Talking the talk in junior interprofessional education: is healthcare terminology a barrier or facilitator?

Abstract

Background Use of healthcare terminology is a potential barrier to interprofessional education (IPE). This study describes how junior learners perceive and classify healthcare terminology in IPE settings. Methods We conducted a mixed methods study involving 29 medical, 14 nursing, and 2 physician assistant students who had previously attended or were registered to participate in educational activities at McMaster University’s Centre for Simulation-Based Learning. 23 participants identified “inclusive” or “exclusive” terminology in a series of scenarios used for IPE workshops using an online survey. We collated lists of “inclusive” and “exclusive” terminology from survey responses, and characterized the frequencies of included words. 22 students participated in focus group discussions on attitudes and perceptions around healthcare terminology after attending IPE workshops. We identified themes through an iterative direct content analysis of verbatim transcripts. Results Students analyzed 14 cases, identifying on average 21 terms per case as healthcare terminology (28% of overall word count). Of the 290 terms identified, 113 terms were classified as healthcare terminology, 46 as inclusive and 17 as exclusive by > 50% of participants. Analysis of focus group transcripts revealed 4 themes: abbreviations were commonly perceived as complex terminology, lack of familiarity with terminology was often attributed to inexperience, simulation was considered a safe space for learning terminology, and learning terminology was a valued IPE objective. Conclusions While students perceive a lot of healthcare terminology in IPE learning materials, categorization of terminology as “inclusive” or “exclusive” is inconsistent. Moreover, healthcare terminology is perceived as a desirable difficulty among junior learners, and should not be avoided in IPE.

Identifying and Mapping Canadian Dietetic Students’ Interaction(s) with Simulation-Based Education: A Scoping Review

“…The SBE literature is diverse in terms of primary outcomes, aims, methods, definitions, and discipline, making the literature difficult to interpret, despite being generally supportive of SBE [16,19]. Dietitian-led research on SBE appears to concentrate on assessment of student learning outcomes (e.g., knowledge uptake, students' perceived learning) and experience (e.g., satisfaction, lived experience), arguably offering a catalyst or invitation for mapping and knowledge synthesis [20][21][22].…”

“…For instance, perspectives, experiences, and knowledge inform point of view or perception, but perspective, experiences, and perception are not one outcome [20,39,40]. Words, labels, and definitions matter and vary within and between disciplines, professions, countries, and individuals [19]. In the case of this scoping review, for example, of the six peer-reviewed articles included, the journals in which they Boolean phrase used for search: All these words: "Nutrition" OR "Dietetics" AND "research" OR "student" OR "graduate" OR "undergraduate" OR "intern" OR "resident" OR "trainee" OR "learner" AND "simulation" OR "simulated" OR "experiential" OR "Role Play" OR "simulated learning" OR "experiential learning" OR "mannequin" OR" peer to peer" OR "peer assisted learning" AND Any of these words: "Knowledge" OR "experience" OR "perception" Review / La revue Review / La revue were published had categorized them as: (i) perspectives in practice (n = 3), (ii) research article (n = 2), and (iii) report (n = 1).…”

Is Interprofessional Learning Only Meant for Professions Within Healthcare? - A Qualitative Analysis of Associations with the Term Interprofessional Collaborative Learning Among Professional Students

“… 1–8 However, these professionals are educated in different educational trajectories, which harbour different disciplinary professional terminologies, identities, cultures, traditions and syllabuses, all of which can act as barriers for professional collaboration and teamwork. 9 …”

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] However, these professionals are educated in different educational trajectories, which harbour different disciplinary professional terminologies, identities, cultures, traditions and syllabuses, all of which can act as barriers for professional collaboration and teamwork. 9 Thus, a shared understanding of the basic terminology used across different educational professional study programmes is essential in interprofessional learning (IPL).…”