1. Teaching Interprofessional Collaborative Care Skills Using a Blended Learning Approach
WGEA
April 2016
8/1/2018
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

2. Amber Fitzsimmons, PT, MS, DPTSc Susan Hyde, DDS, MPH, PhD
Maria Wamsley, MD
Angel Chen, RN, MSN, PNP
Cathi Dennehy, PharmD
Amber Fitzsimmons, PT, MS, DPTSc
Susan Hyde, DDS, MPH, PhD
Kirby Lee, PharmD, MAS
Josette Rivera, MD
Rebecca Shunk, MD UCSF Curriculum Development Working Group
Insert CDWG?
8/1/2018
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

3. Background
Growing recognition of need to teach collaborative care competencies to all health professional students
Multiple barriers to IPE exist
Time availability
Scheduling challenges
Multiple campuses
Resources
Faculty availability
Faculty knowledge and skills

4. On-line learning Increasing popularity
Flexibility for learners and faculty
Allows for “blended” format
Classroom time: application of knowledge and skills practice
May overcome barriers to IPE

5. Methods
Goal: provide early learners with foundational knowledge and skills in interprofessional collaboration
Faculty and learners from five health professions convened a working group
Developed a set of core competencies expected for all UCSF learners upon graduation
Core Principles of Interprofessional Practice
Targeted 1st and 2nd year learners
Partnered with Coursera to create an on-line course
Developed 5 online modules
Complementary face-to-face sessions

6. Methods Learners completed on-line survey after each session
Learner focus groups after first-year of curriculum
Faculty facilitators completed on-line survey after each session

7. On-Line Modules 60-90 minutes in length
Divided into shorter minute segments
Features to increase learner engagement
Video demos
Case examples
Expert interviews
Patient interviews
Integrated quizzes

8. Face-to-Face Sessions
Two-hour sessions, content complementary to on-line modules
Learners in small groups of 10-12
Each group led by a faculty facilitator
Faculty and learners review on-line module prior to face- to-face session
Learners do additional pre-work in advance of the session

9. Core Principles of Interprofessional Practice Year 1
Module 1
Fall
Core Interprofessional Concepts
Course Introduction
Team-building Activity
Module 2
Winter
Roles and Responsibilities/
Scope of Practice
Interviews of Healthcare Professionals
Patient Case Simulation
Module 3
Spring
Communication Tools and Strategies
Skills Practice
Briefs
Debriefs
Huddles
Online content
F2F content

10. Core Principles of Interprofessional Practice Year 2
Module 4
Fall
Conflict Management and Negotiation
Conflict Management Style
Application of Conflict Management Skills
Module 5
Winter
Team Leadership and Membership
Leadership
Self-assessment
Application of Leadership Tools
Online content
F2F content

11. Results
600 First-Year Learners and 55 Facilitators

12. Faculty Facilitator Teaching Experience
Percent
of Total

13. Learner Perceptions Introduction to Core IP Concepts 4.07 – 4.24
Module/Session
Met objectives*
Value of online module (SD)*
Value of face-to face session (SD)*
Introduction to Core IP Concepts
4.07 – 4.24
3.15 (1.05)
3.12 (1.22)
Roles/Responsibilities
4.02 – 4.08
2.99 (1.08)
3.57 (1.15)
Communication skills/tools
3.90 – 4.20
2.80 (1.10)
3.30 (1.20)
Conflict mgmt/negotiation
3.90 – 4.16
2.90 (1.20)
3.40 (1.20)
Leadership/membership
4.00 – 4.10
3.20 (1.20)
Survey response rate 28-50%
*1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent
8/1/2018
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

14. Faculty Perceptions Module/Session Value On-line Module Mean (SD)*
Face-to-Face Mean (SD)*
Introduction to Core IP Concepts
4.31 (.85)
4.31 (.70)
Roles/Responsibilities
3.91 (.71)
4.38 (.55)
Communication skills/tools
3.75 (.80)
4.18 (.86)
Conflict mgmt/negotiation
4.46 (.52)
4.13 (.74)
Leadership/membership
4.00 (.82)
3.79 (.79)
N=18,38,28,21
*1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent
8/1/2018
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

15. Focus Group Results 2 focus groups Focus group 1 (n = 5; nursing)
Focus group 2 (n = 11; interprofessional)
Overall
Curriculum felt like an “add-on”
On-line content
Appreciated flexibility
Wanted increased interactivity e.g. more examples, patient cases, videos
Too lengthy

16. Focus Group Results Face-to-Face Sessions
More time to interact with other learners in their small groups and less structured activity
Large variation in clinical knowledge/skills/experience between professions
Challenge of integrating 5 healthcare professions
Quality of sessions were dependent upon facilitator skills

17. Conclusions…. Learners value flexibility afforded by on-line modules
Learners value interaction with students from other healthcare professions
Faculty tended to rate both online modules and face-to-face sessions more highly than the students
Build more time for informal interaction into face-to-face sessions
Need to increase integration of IPE content into core curriculum and create additional opportunities for engagement with other healthcare professionals
Faculty development is essential

19. Faculty Perceptions
Item
Session 1
Mean (SD)*
n = 18
Session 2
n = 35
Session 3
n = 28
Online module provided important background content for students
4.54 (.52)
4.37 (.49)
4.11 (.50)
Online module provided important background content for me as a facilitator
4.46 (.52)
3.8 (.90)
3.89 (.69)
Felt prepared to facilitate based on
on-line module
4.31 (.75)
4.03 (.71)
3.79 (.83)
Felt prepared to facilitate based on faculty development session
4.36 (.63)
4.44 (.65)
4.14 (.76)
Add the n of participants
*1=strongly disagree 2= disagree 3=neutral 4=agree 5=strongly agree
8/1/2018
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]