Measuring changes in perception using the Student Perceptions of Physician-Pharmacist Interprofessional Clinical Education (SPICE) instrument

BMC Medical Education

Rodney B Young³  Mohammed Samiuddin³  Anitra A MacLaughlin¹  David S Fike²  Eric J MacLaughlin⁴  Joseph A Zorek⁵ 

[1] Hereford Pharmacy LLC, Hereford, TX, USA;School of Graduate Studies and Research, University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio, TX, USA;Department of Family Medicine, TTUHSC School of Medicine, Amarillo, TX, USA;Department of Internal Medicine, TTUHSC School of Medicine, Amarillo, TX, USA;Pharmacy Practice Division, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Pharmacy, 1016 Rennebohm Hall, 777 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705-2222, USA

关键词: Pretest-posttest;    Professional roles;    Interprofessional relations;    Interprofessional teamwork;    Interprofessional collaborative practice;    Interprofessional education;   

Others  :  866707
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-14-101

 received in 2013-09-26, accepted in 2014-05-14,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

The Student Perceptions of Physician-Pharmacist Interprofessional Clinical Education (SPICE) instrument contains 10 items, 3 factors (interprofessional teamwork and team-based practice, roles/responsibilities for collaborative practice, and patient outcomes from collaborative practice), and utilizes a five-point response scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Given the SPICE instrument’s demonstrated validity and reliability, the objective of this study was to evaluate whether it was capable of measuring changes in medical (MS) and pharmacy students’ (PS) perceptions following an interprofessional education (IPE) experience.

Methods

In this prospective cohort study, MS and PS completed the SPICE instrument before and after participation in a predefined IPE experience. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize students and pre-post responses. Independent samples t tests and Fisher’s Exact tests were used to assess group difference in demographic variables. Mann Whitney U tests were used to assess between-group differences in item scores. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank tests were used to evaluate post-participation changes in item scores. Spearman correlations were calculated to assess associations between ordinal demographic variables and item scores, and whether the number of clinic visits completed was associated with post-test responses. Paired samples t tests were used to calculate mean score changes for each of the factors.

Results

Thirty-four MS and 15 PS were enroled. Baseline differences included age (25.3. ± 1.3 MS vs. 28.7 ± 4.4 PS; p = 0.013), years full-time employment (0.71 ± 0.97 MS vs. 4.60 ± 4.55 PS; p < 0.001), and number of prior IPE rotations (1.41 ± 1.74 MS vs. 3.13 ± 2.1 PS; p < 0.001). Two items generated baseline differences; 1 persisted post-participation: whether MS/PS should be involved in teamwork (3.91 MS vs. 4.60 PS; p < 0.001). For all students, significant mean score increases were observed for role clarity (“my role” [3.72 vs. 4.11; p = 0.001] and “others’ roles” [3.87 vs. 4.17; p = 0.001]), impact of teamwork on patient satisfaction (3.72 vs. 4.34; p < 0.001), and ideal curricular location for IPE (4.06 vs. 4.34; p = 0.002). Significant increases were observed for all three factors (teamwork, p = 0.003; roles/responsibilities and patient outcomes, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the SPICE instrument’s ability to measure changes in perception for medical and pharmacy students exposed to an IPE experience, both at the individual item level and at the factor level.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Zorek et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]World Health Organization: Framework for action on interprofessional education & collaborative practice. http://www.who.int/hrh/resources/framework_action/en/ webcite
• [2]Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative: A national interprofessional competency framework. http://www.cihc.ca/files/CIHC_IPCompetencies_Feb1210.pdf webcite
• [3]Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel: Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: report of an expert panel. http://www.aacn.nche.edu/education-resources/ipecreport.pdf webcite
• [4]Accreditation of Interprofessional Health Education: Interprofessional health education accreditation standards guide. http://www.cihc.ca/files/resources/public/English/AIPHE%20Interprofessional%20Health%20Education%20Accreditation%20Standards%20Guide_EN.pdf webcite
• [5]Zorek J, Raehl C: Interprofessional education accreditation standards in the USA: a comparative analysis. J Interprof Care 2013, 27(2):123-130.
• [6]Liaison Committee for Medical Education: Proposed new accreditation standard ED-19-A. http://www.lcme.org/new_standard_ed-19-a.htm webcite
• [7]National Center for Interprofessional Practice and Education: Measurement instruments. http://nexusipe.org/measurement-instruments webcite
• [8]Blue AV, Chesluk BJ, Conforti LN: Assessment and evaluation in IPE: lessons learned from a multi-methods study. https://nexusipe.org/resource-exchange/assessment-and-evaluation-ipe-lessons-learned-multi-methods-study webcite
• [9]Hughes C: What you need to know about the Medicare preventive services expansion. Fam Pract Manag 2011, 18(1):22-25.
• [10]Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Medicare Learning Network: The ABCs of providing the Annual Wellness Visit (AWV). http://www.cms.gov/Outreach-and-Education/Medicare-Learning-Network-MLN/MLNProducts/Downloads/AWV_Chart_ICN905706.pdf webcite
• [11]Zwarenstein M, Reeves S, Barr H, Hammick M, Koppel I, Atkins J: Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001., 1CD002213
• [12]Reeves S, Zwarenstein M, Goldman J, Barr H, Freeth D, Hammick M, Koppel I: Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008, 1:CD002213.
• [13]Reeves S, Perrier L, Goldman J, Freeth D, Zwarenstein M: Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013., 3CD002213
• [14]Fagin CM: Collaboration between nurses and physicians: no longer a choice. Acad Med 1992, 67(5):295-303.
• [15]Poulton DC, West MA: Effective multidisciplinary teamwork in primary healthcare. J Adv Nurs 1993, 18(6):918-925.
• [16]Carter BL, Bergus GR, Dawson JD, Farris KB, Doucette WR, Chrischilles EA, Hartz AJ: A cluster randomized trial to evaluate physician/pharmacist collaboration to improve blood pressure control. J Clin Hypertens 2008, 10(4):260-271.
• [17]Smith MA: Pharmacists and the primary care workforce. Ann Pharmacother 2012, 46(11):1568-1571.
• [18]Young HM, Siegel EO, McCormick WC, Fulmer T, Harootyan LK, Dorr DA: Interdisciplinary collaboration in geriatrics: advancing health for older adults. Nurs Outlook 2011, 59(4):243-250.
• [19]McCaffrey R, Hayes RM, Cassell A, Miller-Reyes S, Donaldson A, Ferrell C: The effect of an educational programme on attitudes of nurses and medical residents towards the benefits of positive communication and collaboration. J Adv Nurs 2012, 68(2):293-301.
• [20]Carter BL, Ardery G, Dawson JD, James PA, Bergus GR, Doucette WR, Chrischilles EA, Franciscus CL, Xu Y: Physician and pharmacist collaboration to improve blood pressure control. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169(21):1996-2002.
• [21]Willen D, Cripps R, Wilson A, Wolff K, Rothman R: Interdisciplinary team care for diabetic patients by primary care physicians, advanced practice nurses, and clinical pharmacists. Clin Diabetes 2011, 29(2):60-68.
• [22]Boorsma M, Frijters DH, Knol DL, Ribbe ME, Nijpels G, van Hout HP: Effects of multidisciplinary integrated care on quality of care in residential care facilities for elderly people: a cluster randomized trial. CMAJ 2011, 183(11):E724-E732.
• [23]Engelhardt JB, McClive-Reed KP, Toseland RW, Smith TL, Larson DG, Tobin DR: Effects of a program for coordinated care of advanced illness on patients, surrogates, and healthcare costs: a randomized trial. Am J Manag Care 2006, 12(2):93-100.
• [24]Heinemann GD, Schmitt MH, Farrell MP, Brallier SA: Development of an attitudes toward health care teams scale. Eval Health Prof 1999, 22(1):123-142.
• [25]Hyer K, Fairchild S, Abraham I, Mezey M, Fulmer T: Measuring attitudes related to interdisciplinary training: revisiting the Heinemann, Schmitt and Farrell ‘attitudes toward health care teams’ scale. J Interprof Care 2000, 14(3):249-258.
• [26]Leipzig RM, Hyer K, Ek K, Wallenstein S, Vezina ML, Fairchild S, Cassel CK, Howe JL: Attitudes toward working on interdisciplinary healthcare teams: a comparison by discipline. J Am Geriatr Soc 2002, 50:1141-1148.
• [27]Fulmer T, Hyer K, Flaherty E, Mezey M, Whitelaw N, Jacobs MO, Luchi R, Hansen JC, Evans DA, Cassel C, Kotthoff-Burrell E, Kane R, Pfeiffer E: Geriatric interdisciplinary team training program: evaluation results. J Aging Health 2005, 17(4):443-470.
• [28]Curran VR, Heath O, Kearney A, Button P: Evaluation of an interprofessional collaboration workshop for post-graduate residents, nursing and allied health professionals. J Interprof Care 2010, 24(3):315-318.
• [29]American Pharmacists Association: Patient access to pharmacists’ care coalition. http://www.pharmacist.com/providerstatusrecognition webcite
• [30]American Academy of Family Physicians: AAFP defines role of pharmacists, family physicians in health care delivery system. http://www.aafp.org/news/inside-aafp/20120118pharmacypaper.html webcite