International Innovation Project: Outcomes from an ...

International Innovation Project: Outcomes from an Interprofessional Student Experience Kelly Macauley1, Hanne Skov2, Krista Lehtonen3, Ulla Vehkapera3, Toini Harra3, Elizabeth Torcivia4 , Howard J. Phillips4 1MGH

Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA, 2Metropolitan University College, Copenhagen, Denmark, 3Metropolia University of Applied Sciences, Helsinki, Finland, 4Seton Hall University, South Orange, NJ.

INTRODUCTION

RESULTS

Interprofessional collaboration and the ability to function effectively as a member of a team are of paramount importance in order for practitioners to be successful in today’s dynamic healthcare environment. The need for healthcare professionals to be innovative and think creatively is also necessary. An international learning opportunity further enriches an experience by increasing the students’ cultural sensitivity and ability to work with diverse populations. A course was created, “Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Change Agents in Health Care”, to address these objectives. While there is literature demonstrating the benefits of interprofessional education (IPE), there is a paucity of evidence investigating the benefits to the learners in international, interprofessional models.

2011-2013 Survey Results A pre- and post- IIP survey was administered to each cohort. Survey consisted of 9 items measured on 0-10 scale.  In 2011 & 2012, participants were asked at the program conclusion to rate themselves pre- and post-.  In 2013, a pre-survey and post-survey was administered.  N = 71 (2011= 23, 2012 = 22, 2013 = 26)  A Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare the preand post- responses in 2013. All significant at < 0.05 except Collaboration (0.551), Innovation (0.058) and International (0.066)

PURPOSE To retrospectively assess student perceptions and outcomes after participation in the International Innovation Project (IIP).

METHODS  All students accepted into IIP in 2011, 2012 and 2013 were included. All students were volunteers from their respective programs. Disciplines included PT, OT, SLP, PA, SW and nutrition services.  All students were enrolled in entry-level health professional education courses at one of four institutions: MGH Institute of Health Professions, Seton Hall University, Metropolia University of Applied Sciences and Metropolitan University College.  A summative assessment and weekly formative surveys were collected during the course each year. Surveys were constructed to solicit student feedback in order to assess the perceived quality of the course experience across several parameters.  The surveys were created by the coordinators of the course and were administered on paper (2011), via Seton Hall online survey tool (2012) and Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap, 2013).

CONCLUSIONS

Means of Student Responses for Question Content 2011

2012

2013

Before

After

Before

After

Before

After

Motivation

77.00

65.00

75.45

87.70

78.46

82.31

Collaboration

73.35

78.45

70.45

85.90

76.15

85.00

Project Management

57.8

77.6

59.09

80.90

66.15

76.92

Multidisciplinary

66.45

78.45

67.27

86.36

65.38

80.77

Professional Growth

65.05

79.8

64.76

84.28

68.08

83.08

Innovative Thinking

44.9

76.8

49.09

80.00

64.62

80.77

R&D

64.4

72.4

65.00

76.36

65.20

76.00

International Project

82.95

84.8

80.00

94.09

81.15

88.46

Information Seeking

65.3

75.8

62.27

71.42

61.54

73.08

2013 Open Ended Question Qualitative Analysis  Performed on the 3 open ended questions in IIP 2013.  5 faculty analyzed responses and derived themes.  Survey response rate:  Question 1: 23/26 (88%)  Questions 2 and 3: 16/26 (62%)  Themes were narrowed through an iterative process.  The themes for each question are listed below.  1. How did iip 2013 change you?  Increased ability to collaborate and work in a team  Increased knowledge and understanding of innovation  Increased knowledge of other cultures and health care systems (cultural competence)  Increased confidence and personal growth/selfimprovement  Improved English language skills  2. What did you contribute to the group process?  Language: native English speakers addressed writing needs and native Danish speakers assumed translator role  Learned how to play specific group roles: leader/organizer, team player, push creative process, and maintain task orientation  3. What did you learn about working in a group specifically at IIP 2013?  Benefits of diversity within a group  Importance of respect for groups differences and needs  Importance of honest, group communication to achieve goals during collaborative process

2013 Reflections on 2011 Experience  An open-ended, 5 question, follow-up survey was sent in the fall 2013 to the 2011 participations.  4/15 (27%) American, Danish and Finnish students responded.  General benefits to the program are  “Teamwork takes listening to each member of the team being heard and then working together to come to a common decision.” “A motivated and dedicated team can achieve excellent results.”  “Each discipline: social work, OT and PT come at patient care from different perspectives, all to achieve the same goal for the patient (return to function and participation in the community).” “I have gained a new perspective on how other countries handle health care, and what works and what doesn’t…The interaction across cultures was the most beneficial.”  “I attempt to be innovative with my patients every day…Things don’t have to stay the same, we have the power to make a difference, and it is so much better when you are not alone.”

 Through participation in IIP, students have learned valuable skills (information seeking, innovative thinking) that will assist them in future clinical practice.  Working in groups enhanced the students collaboration skills in problem solving and the innovation process, and ability to work in multidisciplinary teams.  It increased their knowledge and understanding of the other disciplines’ roles. “Recognition of the value of other professionals for patient care is an important prerequisite for collaboration to occur.”1 This improvement may be explained by the theory of co-occupation, where shared emotionality, physicality and intentionality enhances a learning experience.2  Taught them to transition to different group roles as needed to accomplish tasks. It increased their communication skills. The students’ realization that this was imperative for effective teamwork has been previously documented.2,3  Assisted students in learning the value of collaboration.  The participants’ viewed that their cultural competence was enhanced by this international collaboration. This viewpoint is mirrored in other international, interprofessional experiences.4  The innovation skills learned during IIP are beneficial and applicable to patient care.

REFERENCES 1. Suter E, Arndt J, Arthur N et al. Role understanding and effective communication as core competencies for collaborative practice. Journal of Interprofessional Care. January 2009; 23(1):41-51. 2. Pickes ND, Pizur-Barnekow K. Co-occupation: Extending the dialogue. Journal of Occupational Science. October 2009; 16(3):151-156. 3. Kripalani S, LeFevre F, Phillips C et al. Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians. JAMA. March 2007;297:831-841. 4. Morton J. Transcultural healthcare immersion: A unique interprofessional experience poised to influence collaborative practice in cultural settings. Work. 2012; 41:303-312.