Columbus Publishers

International Journal of Nursing and Health Care Science

Volume 01: Issue 14

Boyce PS, et al.

Key facilitators for optimal scheduling include representation of more than two professions including at least one learner per profession on each team [7]. Barriers to the use of simulations included not having enough learners, learner’s lack of experience with IPE or simulations, learners feeling uncomfortable with being observed, differing knowledge and skill levels by profession, poor learner attitudes, and incorporating learners who are required and elect to participate in the simulation [7]. Including simulations in required courses is also documented as furthering IPE success [7].

Requiring participation and possibly including incentives, such as course credit [35] and full integration into the curriculum fosters engagement of students and faculty and highlights the benefits of IPE. In Sim-IPE using video cases, Willgerodt and colleagues [34] found that students required to attend had higher levels of participation. Likewise, Caines and colleagues [14] felt that attendance for their IPE was excellent for registered dietitian students because it was a course requirement. It has also been suggested that IPE programs should offer additional course credit when not a part of a course [35] and/or offer class release time [41]. Willgerodt and colleagues [34] recommend creating agreements (not only verbal promises) to encourage faculty and program engagement. According to an intensive literature review of 40 papers on IPE in higher education, barriers related to curriculum integration are due to resource intensiveness, requiring dedicated staffing and funding [37].

Team composition. Three factors pertaining to team composition are most frequently highlighted by students: level of learner, professional relevance of team members, and mentor-team mismatch [35]. Furthermore, it is recommended that at least two students from each program participate to increase participation and confidence from students in the experience [34] or a somewhat even balance of participants from various disciplines [39]. In a study with OT, SLP, and dietetic students in Australia, when only one student was part of a breakout group, that discipline’s perspective did not receive as much attention [40]. In Smith et al.’s IPE with pharmacy and dental students, students requested to be placed in smaller interprofessional teams with a more even distribution of pharmacy to dental students to collaborate more effectively [42]. In another IPE experience, student participants felt that having nursing students would have improved the overall learning and experience [40]. Robertson and colleagues [28] evaluated nursing and medical students who participated in the IPE experience about the IPE experience itself and found that students felt that the breakout groups should have been larger (i.e., 7-8 students instead of 5) and that student should be required to speak at least once and to utilize the video function of Zoom to increase participation as the online environment can encourage only a couple of student participants. This aligns Zoom© with Prasad and colleagues use of (Zoom Video Communications Inc., 2020) breakout groups, where 10- 12 students participated. Enablers of IPE identified in a literature review of IPE programs in higher education found the strength of the facilitators significantly contributed to perceived success - their facilitation skills, enthusiasm, ability to act as role models, and respect for other disciplines [37]. While training facilitators is necessary, it is just as important for facilitators have actual, real world interprofessional experiences to draw from [43].

Differentiating Clinical Experiences and Simulation. IPE is typically not seen as a replacement for clinical interactions but used to support both classroom and work-based learning [27]. In a survey of 30 health professions programs with established IPE, over 50% of respondents reported that they had a required first year course or experience in place [38]. While some students have criticized the usefulness of IPE SIM experiences when they already had clinical experiences [28,35], studies show that Sim-IPE can be beneficial for advanced students, when designed with these learners in mind [34]. It may not be realistic to expect students from various disciplines to have similar clinical experiences and these clinical differences can be used to the advantage in a Sim-IPE scenario. Prasad and colleagues [27] conducted an IPE in which midwifery students had prior experience in the delivery suite and medical students had none. As a result, midwifery students were able to initiate more relevant questions and discussion, which reportedly helped to engage the medical students. The discussion was enhanced and more in-depth because of their collective contributions.

## Case Scenario Design

Using realistic cases that may be adapted to reflect the learner's knowledge and skills is another facilitator to a successful IPE experience. Additionally, allowing repetitive practice to learn from mistakes and including a debriefing session are useful [7]. In a survey of 30 health professions programs with established IPE programs, a range of activity types are offered: didactic electives, required coursework, service learning, standalone events, seminar series, student organization activities, online activities, and “Other” activities, i.e., student run free clinics,