METHOD: This research is a quasi-experimental design with a pre-post without control research approach. The research population covers all students registered joining OTOF CIPIPEC at Poltekkes Kemenkes Surakarta with a total number of 1061 of students. The samples are collected using a total sampling technique. The samples for this research are those registered joining the OTOF CIPIPEC at Poltekkes Kemenkes Surakarta meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria with a total number of 1031 of students. This research utilizes the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) questionnaires as its measuring instruments. This study was conducted in Mojosongo sub-district, Jebres district, Surakarta. This research involves 38 Community Units (In Indonesia known as Rukun Warga/RW) with a total number of 1066 of family heads and the Sibela Community Health Center. The data are analyzed using the Wilcoxon test and multiple linear regression test.
RESULT OF THE STUDY: The research results showed that there is a significant difference of readiness improvement, teamwork, and perception on other professions and satisfaction of the research subjects before and after joining OTOF-CIPIPEC (ρ<0.001). The average improvement scores of students' readiness, teamwork, perception, and satisfaction are 63.2%, 62.5%, 62.57%, and 113.04% respectively. The results of the multivariate analysis show that teamwork and perception significantly influence the students' readiness in their collaboration with the other professions (ρ<0.001) with the influence value of 0.93%.
CONCLUSION: This research concludes that OTOF-CIPIPEC implementation may improve readiness, teamwork, and perception of other professions and students' satisfaction in interprofessional education (IPE).
METHODS: A total of doctors (39) and nurses (37) were recruited for an interventional study on the interprofessional learning approach on hospital acquired infection control. The participants responded to the University of West England Interprofessional (UWEIP) questionnaire at baseline consisting of four dimensions in IPL aspects; Self-assessment on communication and teamwork skills (CTW), interprofessional learning (IPL), interprofessional interaction (IPI), and interprofessional relationship (IPR). The Cronbach alpha value for the total questionnaire was established at 0.79.
RESULTS: The majority of doctors scored positive in CTW, IPL, IPR, and neutral in IPI. Nurses' also recorded the highest positive scores in CTW, IPL, and IPR, and neutral in IPI. Negative scores were found in CTW and IPI. A significant difference was revealed between doctors and nurses in IPL attitude; p = 0.024 and there was no significant difference in other dimensions (p > .05). Results also found a significant difference between participants' and non-participants of IPL training sessions; p = 0.009.
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the infusion of interprofessional learning training among the health professionals displayed better self-assessments, attitudes, and perceptions towards collaborative practices.
Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted between January and March 2018 at the International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuantan, Malaysia. The Self-Efficacy for Interprofessional Experiential Learning scale was used to evaluate the self-efficacy of 336 students from five faculties including nursing, medicine, dentistry, pharmacy and allied health sciences.
Results: Significant differences in self-efficacy scores for the interprofessional interaction subscale were identified according to programme of study, with pharmacy students scoring significantly lower than allied health students (mean score: 54.1 ± 10.4 versus 57.4 ± 10.1; P = 0.014). In addition, there was a significant difference in self-efficacy scores for the interprofessional interaction subscale according to year of study, with first-year students scoring significantly lower compared to fifth-year students (mean score: 52.8 ± 10.4 versus 59.9 ± 11.9; P = 0.018). No statistically significant differences in self-efficacy scores were identified with regards to gender or for the interprofessional team evaluation and feedback subscale.
Conclusion: These findings may contribute to the effective implementation of IPL education in healthcare faculties. Acknowledging the influence of self-efficacy on the execution of IPL skills is crucial to ensure healthcare students are able to adequately prepare for future interprofessional collaboration in real clinical settings.
METHODS: Prospective, mixed-methods process evaluation to answer the following: (1) how was the collaborative delivered by the faculty and received, understood and enacted by the participants; (2) what influenced teams' ability to improve care for patients requiring emergency cholecystectomy? We collected and analysed a range of data including field notes, ethnographic observations of meetings, and project documentation. Analysis was based on the framework approach, informed by Normalisation Process Theory, and involved the creation of comparative case studies based on hospital performance during the project.
RESULTS: Chole-QuIC was delivered as planned and was well received and understood by participants. Four hospitals were identified as highly successful, based upon a substantial increase in the number of patients having surgery in line with national guidance. Conversely, four hospitals were identified as challenged, achieving no significant improvement. The comparative analysis indicate that six inter-related influences appeared most associated with improvement: (1) achieving clarity of purpose amongst site leads and key stakeholders; (2) capacity to lead and effective project support; (3) ideas to action; (4) learning from own and others' experience; (5) creating additional capacity to do emergency cholecystectomies; and (6) coordinating/managing the patient pathway.
CONCLUSION: Collaborative-based quality improvement is a viable strategy for emergency surgery but success requires the deployment of effective clinical strategies in conjunction with improvement strategies. In particular, achieving clarity of purpose about proposed changes amongst key stakeholders was a vital precursor to improvement, enabling the creation of additional surgical capacity and new pathways to be implemented effectively. Protected time, testing ideas, and the ability to learn quickly from data and experience were associated with greater impact within this cohort.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the perceptions of Malaysian hospital pharmacists and patients on the barriers and facilitators of a PCC approach in pharmacist consultations.
DESIGN: This study employed a qualitative, explorative semi-structured interview design.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were conducted with 17 patients and 18 pharmacists from three tertiary hospitals in Malaysia. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Emerging themes were developed through a constant comparative approach and thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Three themes were identified in this study: (i) patient-related factors (knowledge, role expectations, and sociocultural characteristics), (ii) pharmacist-related factors (personalities and communication), and (iii) healthcare institutional and system-related factors (resources, continuity of care, and interprofessional collaboration). Pharmacists and patients mentioned that factors such as patients' knowledge and attitudes and pharmacists' personality traits and communication styles can affect patients' engagement in the consultation. Long waiting time and insufficient manpower were perceived as barriers to the practice of PCC. Continuity of care and interprofessional collaboration were viewed as crucial in providing supportive and tailored care to patients.
CONCLUSION: The study findings outlined the potential factors of PCC that may influence its implementation in pharmacist consultations. Strategic approaches can be undertaken by policymakers, healthcare institutions, and pharmacists themselves to address the identified barriers to more fully support the implementation of PCC in the pharmacy setting.
METHODS: This study is based on the collective and direct experiences of the founding members of the HTAsiaLink Network. Data were collected from presentations they made at various international forums and additional information was reviewed. Data analysis was done using the framework developed by San Martin-Rodriguez et al.Results and Conclusions:HTAsiaLink is a network of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies in Asia established in 2011 with the aim of strengthening individual and institutional HTA capacity, reducing duplication and optimizing resources, transfer and sharing of HTA-related lessons among members, and beyond. During its 6 years, the network has expanded, initiating several capacity building activities and joint-research projects, raising awareness of the importance of HTA within the region and beyond, and gaining global recognition while establishing relationships with other global networks. The study identifies the determinants of success of the collaboration. The systemic factors include the favorable outlook toward HTA as an approach for healthcare priority setting in countries with UHC mandates. On organizational factors, the number of newly established HTA agencies in the region with similar needs for capacity building and peer-to-peer support was catalytic for the network development. The interactional aspects include ownership, trust, and team spirit among network members. The network, however, faces challenges notably, financial sustainability and management of the expanded network.