Transcript Slide 1
Health-care professionals’ shared and
divergent perspectives on interprofessional
practice and interprofessional education
Redden, K. C., Chin, K., Birlean, C., Steinert, Y., Shore, B. M., & Purden, M.
The McGill Educational Initiative on Interprofessional
Collaboration: Partnership for Patient and Family
Centered Practice
Faculty of Medicine
McGill University
Introduction
The McGill Group:
Understand and facilitate IPP and IPE in hospital
and university settings.
Evaluation Task Force:
Document the group’s development and activities.
Goal of Current Study:
Describe members’ perspectives on IPP and IPE.
Research Questions
What are various health-care professionals’
personal conceptions of IPP and IPE?
What are the perceived benefits and
challenges to IPP and IPE?
How do professionals see the relationship
between IPP and IPE?
Methods
Participants
N = 9: 4 nurses, 2 doctors, 1 physical therapist,
1 occupational therapist, 1 psychologist
Researcher-developed open-ended interview
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Open & Axial Coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1998)
Saturation and 100% agreement on emerging patterns
Results compared to existing models in literature
Results
Definition of IPP
Associated Benefits and Challenges
Definition of IPE
Associated Benefits and Challenges
Relationship between IPP and IPE
Interpretations
Shared Conceptions:
Benefits and Challenges of IPP and IPE
Definitions of IPE
Divergent Conceptions:
Relationship between IPP and IPE
Definition of IPP:
Environment
Hierarchy
Timing of exposure to IPE
Reflection of D’Amour & Oandasan’s (2005) model
Implications
Generated discussion among members of the
team
Baseline data for a longitudinal study focused
on this group’s development over the life of this
project
Thank You
All Together Better Health
The McGill Educational Initiative on
Interprofessional Collaboration:
Partnerships for Family-Centered Practice
Health Canada