Search

Over the past five years, the development of interprofessional education programmes has been gaining momentum in Germany fostering the need to evaluate these with appropriate instruments. Instead of developing a new instrument for evaluation purposes, the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) was chosen, as it is a widespread instrument that has been used in a variety of different educational settings and countries. The German version of the RIPLS was administered in two sites to health professional students in Heidelberg and Freiburg, Germany. Cronbach’s alpha was used to examine internal consistency. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed for confirmation of the underlying factor structure of the RIPLS-D. In total, 531 questionnaires were analysed. The instrument showed overall reliability (0.81) and low reliability (< 0.7) in the subscales. The underlying factor structure could not be confirmed. These results contribute further evidence on deficits with the RIPLS. Despite known issues, the RIPLS continues to be translated and applied. This paper highlights the problematic issues in the RIPLS-D and does not recommend its use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Students' Perceptions of Physician-Pharmacist Interprofessional Clinical Education and its revision (SPICE, SPICE-R) were designed to understand medicine and pharmacy students' perceptions of interprofessional education and collaborative practice in managing complex health problems. The SPICE-R authors, however, suggested for additional items for subscales "roles and responsibilities for collaborative care" and "patient outcomes from collaborative practice". We added two items and introduced SPICE-R3 to differentiate it from the 10-item SPICE-R2 and to adapt the scale to a wider range of healthcare members. We administered the SPICE-R3 to healthcare students at the height of the COVID-19 outbreak in Hong Kong in February 2020. Using data from 225 students from Chinese medicine, medicine, nursing, and pharmacy, confirmatory factor analysis indicated nine items having acceptable item coefficients. Our data obtained a good fit to the three-factor, nine-item model suggesting construct validity. Results of the between-network analysis suggest that the three subscales of SPICE-R3 correlated systematically with other theoretically relevant variables in the nomological network suggesting convergent validity. The SPICE-R3 is a valid measure to examine Hong Kong healthcare students' interprofessional attitudes in online interprofessional education even during the pandemic. Implications and directions for future research are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Healthcare professionals' attitudes play a significant role in influencing team behavior, and thereby affect the quality and safety of patient care. Culturally adapted and validated questionnaires may contribute valuable knowledge of professionals' attitudes toward teamwork. The aim of the study was to translate and cross-validate the TeamSTEPPS Teamwork Attitude Questionnaire (T-TAQ) into Norwegian, and to test the questionnaire for psychometric properties among Norwegian healthcare professionals. The T-TAQ, measuring five dimensions of attitude towards teamwork, was translated according to a model of back translation. Healthcare professionals (N = 247) from various hospital settings responded. A Pearson correlation coefficient, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), test–retest reliability, Cronbach's alpha, and McDonald's omega were conducted. The inter-correlation test of the T-TAQ dimensions ranged from 0.16 to 0.54. The CFA showed a Root Mean Square Error of Approximation of (RMSEA) = 0.061. Test-retest showed Intraclass Correlation Coefficient scores from 0.73 to 0.86, with Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega demonstrating values from 0.53 to 0.76 (alpha) and 0.57 to 0.76 (omega) on the five dimensions. The Norwegian version of T-TAQ revealed potential concerning the psychometric property for measuring healthcare professionals' attitudes toward teamwork in hospital settings. Further testing with a sample that is more proportionally composed in terms of an interprofessional mix is therefore proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS) is one of the popular measures of perceptions of collaboration. In its original inception, a four-factor model was proposed but subsequent study offered alternative measurement models: three-factor model, two-factor model, and further revision of the three-factor model. Despite the changes in the model structures, none of these has been examined in the Asian context which could have paved the way for local researchers to start representing Asian perspectives in the discussion of interprofessional practice and cooperation in medical education. This study therefore aimed to examine the measurement properties of the IEPS by testing the four a priori models using the data from 335 Chinese students from eight prelicensure health and social care programs from two universities in Hong Kong. Through item analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and regression, the results suggest that the 12-item, three-factor model best represented the sample and was invariant across genders and year levels. Theoretical and practical implications to interdisciplinary education literature are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health professional education programs increasingly incorporate interprofessional education (IPE) activities into curricula in response to evolving health policy and accreditation requirements in an effort to highlight the benefits of, and prepare students for, interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP). As such, there is a need for statistically valid instruments designed to assess baseline student perceptions regarding IPE and IPCP. Using confirmatory factor analysis, this study compared the reliability and construct validity of a revised 21-item Attitudes Toward Health Care Teams (ATHCT-R) instrument and a 10-item Student Perceptions of Interprofessional Clinical Education-Revised (SPICE-R) instrument. The instruments were concurrently administered online and completed by a total of 221 first year nursing, optometry, pharmacy, physical therapy, and health administration students. In this study, the SPICE-R exhibited better performance in terms of goodness of fit, construct validity, and reliability compared with the ATHCT-R. The SPICE-R instrument demonstrates promise as a parsimonious, valid, and reliable tool for measuring health professional students' perceptions of IPE and IPCP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to assess reliability and validity of the adapted 'Attitudes Toward Health Care Teams Scale (ATHCTS)' with graduate professional students. Data using a cross-sectional design were collected from 288 graduate students who were enrolled at an urban professional university in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was run and it was found that a two-factor ATHCTS better represented the sample. Further, it provided evidence that the two-factor model is valid, and the quality of care and time constraint subscales are reliable. This study suggested that the two-factor model should be tested with different populations, such as undergraduate students, health care professionals and persons at other training programs. The ATHCTS can be used as an assessment tool to evaluate the effectiveness of educational or training programs designed to improve the attitude of graduate students toward interprofessional teamwork. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The original version of the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) was published by Parsell and Bligh (1999). Three sub-scales with acceptable or high internal consistencies were suggested, however two publications suggested different sub-scales. An investigation into how to improve the reliability for use of the RIPLS instrument with undergraduate health-care students commenced. Content analysis on the original 19 items involving experienced health-care staff resulted in four sub-scales. These sub-scales were then used to formulate a possible model within a structural equation model. The goodness of fit was assessed using a sample ( n = 308) of new first year undergraduate students from 8 different health and social care programmes. The same data was fitted to each of the two original sub-scale models suggested by Parsell and Bligh (1999) and the results compared. The fit of the new four sub-scale model appears superior to either of the original models. The new four factor model was then tested on subsequent data ( n = 247) obtained from the same students at the end of their first year. The fit was seen to be even better at the end of the academic year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]