Understanding interprofessional education : a multiple-case study of students, faculty, and administrators

Abstract

Although interprofessional education (IPE) opportunities can help prepare students for future practice and patient-centered care, many health professions students in the country are not educated in an environment with opportunities to learn with, from, or about students from other health professions. With upcoming curricular changes at the Indiana University School of Medicine (IUSM) and the Indiana University School of Nursing (IUSN), IPE remains at the forefront of these changes in both schools. To date, few studies have explored student, faculty, and administrators’ conceptualizations of IPE prior to formal implementation. Additionally, previous studies have not compared IPE conceptualizations across these groups. This multiple-case study explores and compares how groups of stakeholders from the IUSM (Indianapolis) and the IUSN (Indianapolis) conceptualize IPE. Data collection included the examination of discipline-specific public documents and one-on-one interviews (N=25) with pre-licensure students, clinical faculty, and administrators from each school. Coding and extraction of themes transpired through within-case and cross-case analysis and data supported the following findings: the ‘business of medicine’ may prevent IPE from becoming a priority in education; stakeholders’ conceptualizations of IPE are shaped through powerful experiences in education and practice; students desire more IPE opportunities at the institution; stakeholders at the IUSN have a long-standing investment in IPE; and the institution requires a ‘culture shift’ in order to sustain IPE efforts. The findings suggest that IPE belongs in all education sectors and IPE efforts deserve reward and reimbursement. The findings also insinuate that leadership, roles, and team training education belong in IPE and IPE culture requires all individuals’ (e.g., student, faculty, administrators, patients) commitment. Importantly, the institution must continue IPE development, research, and dissemination. These findings can help shape curricula as time progresses, increase the likelihood of developing a successful new curriculum, and prompt ongoing reflection about IPE. This information can influence how institutions approach IPE and may lead to a more successful and informed IPE curriculum in the first years of implementation. And, hopefully what is learned through IPE will be translated into healthcare practice environments.