• No results found

INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION:

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION:"

Copied!
22
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION:

LESSONS LEARNED IN A CASE-BASED

COLLABORATIVE MENTAL HEALTH PRACTICE

MODULE OFFERED OVER SEVEN YEARS

Taryn Hearn, MD, FRCPC

Associate Professor, Memorial University of Newfoundland e-mail: [email protected]

www.mun.ca COLLABORATIVE MENTAL HEALTH MODULE: LESSONS LEARNED

(2)

AUTHORS

• Michele Neary, PhD, RPsych., Assist. Prof, UCC

• Leslie Phillips, PharmD, Professor, School Of Pharmacy

• Nicole Snow , PhD(c), RN, CPMHN(C), Assis Prof., School of Nursing • Adam Reid, MASP, Research Coordinator, CCHPE

• Carla Dillon, ACPR, PharmD., Assoc. Prof., School of Pharmacy • Robert J. Meadus, PhD, RN, Assoc .Prof, School of Nursing

• Florence Budden BN, RN, CPMHN(C) Nursing Instructor, CNS • Glenda Manning , RN, BN, MN, Faculty, CNS

(3)

OBJECTIVES

• Describe the existing Collaborative Mental Health

Practice Module

• Identify the impetus for and the changes made to

the module over seven years

• Discuss the ongoing challenges to providing this

IPE activity

(4)

COLLABORATIVE MENTAL

HEALTH MODULE

• Started in 2006

• Case based, blended learning

• Combines online and face-to-face learning

• Students involved:

• 2nd year medicine

• 3rd year nursing

• 4th year pharmacy

• 5th year social work

(5)

STUDENT ATTENDEES

COLLABORATIVE MENTAL HEALTH MODULE: LESSONS LEARNED

211 174 144 252 261 252 271 278 0 100 200 300 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Overall Attendance by Year

Female: 78% Male: 19%

Prefer Not to Say: 2%

Overall Student Gender

Medicine: 24%

Nursing: 43%

Pharmacy: 14%

Social Work: 17%

Psychology: 1%

Overall Student Profession

(6)

COLLABORATIVE MENTAL

HEALTH MODULE

Facilitators involved

• Faculty and practitioners from the professions

Standardized patients

(7)

GOALS OF MODULE

• Identify and describe the role of the their professions in

collaborative management of individuals with depression

• Identify and discuss the role of other professions in

collaborative management of individuals with depression

COLLABORATIVE MENTAL HEALTH MODULE: LESSONS LEARNED

• Identify the importance of interprofessional team work in the provision of health care for individuals with depression

(8)

GOALS OF MODULE

• Work collaboratively to develop an interprofessional care plan for an individual with depression

• Recognize the value of the roles of other health professionals in an interprofessional team approach

• Describe the important

characteristics of a patient / client-centered approach to

interprofessional teamwork for individuals with depression

(9)

EVALUATION

• Student evaluations

• Respondent characteristics

• Student satisfaction

• Open-ended questions assessing likes/dislikes

and learning objectives • Facilitator evaluations

• Based on observations of small group dynamics

and functioning

• Standardized patients

• Based on interactions with small group

(10)

MENTAL HEALTH MODULE BLENDED

LEARNING MODEL IN 2006 & 2007

E-Learning Component (1 – 2 hours) • Self-learning tutorial • Case study • Online discussion Moderated Interprofessional Panel Discussion: (1 hour) Curricular Development Team & Invited Panel

Before Face-to-face (1 week)

Face-to-Face Learning Activities Evening time slot (19:00 – 21:30)

Facilitated Small-group Learning: (1.5 hours) • Case study • Interprofessional care plan formulation

(11)

FEEDBACK

• Positives

• Involvement of four disciplines

• Quality of small group interaction

• Case incorporated all professions

• Negatives

• Material in each module was overly repetitive

• Students felt panelists put participants on the spot

• Online component difficult to navigate

(12)

INTERPROFESSIONAL TEAM

BRAINSTORMING SESSION

• Move the session within class hours

• Decrease or remove the online component

• Model a real-life interprofessional team meeting

• Written case

• Video

• Standardized patient

• Interprofessional or uniprofessional interaction • Panel discussion

(13)

MODULE BLENDED LEARNING MODEL:

2008 TO PRESENT

Online Component • Conceptual Knowledge • Self-Study Interprofessional Small-Group (1 hour) • Present Profession-specific issues • Formulate

inter-professional care plan • Facilitated discussion

of collaborative process

Before Face-to-face (1 week)

Face-to-Face Learning Activities Daytime time slot (09:00 – 11:30)

Uniprofessional Small-Group (1 hour) • Preparation of Profession-specific Interview Questions • Interview SP

(14)

WHAT THIS REQUIRES

• A case that is relevant to all professions • A case that is adaptable

• Either gender of standardized patient

• To the addition of other professional disciplines

• Facilities and supports

• Around 25 facilitators, 25 standardized patients, 25

rooms!

• Facilitator training

(15)

OUTCOME

– MEAN SATISFACTION

SCORES BY YEAR

3.87 3.68 4.44 4.40 4.32 4.36 4.33 4.36 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Mean Satisfac tion Year of Module

COLLABORATIVE MENTAL HEALTH MODULE: LESSONS LEARNED

Changes

Implemented

(16)

60.8% 95.8% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

I WOULD RECOMMEND THIS MODULE

TO OTHER LEARNERS

(17)

WHAT THE STUDENTS SAY

COLLABORATIVE MENTAL HEALTH MODULE: LESSONS LEARNED

“The case was realistic, we got to interact, discuss and describe the scenario within our own roles before moving to interdisciplinary.

Learned roles of other professions.”

“I liked how the standardized patient gave out different information to the nursing students, medical students, pharmacy students and social

work students. This really emphasized the importance of an interdisciplinary team in filling the gaps that are missed by some

professions.”

(18)

STUDENT RESPONSE THEMES

• Positives

• Learned about professional roles

• Standardized patient interaction

• Uniprofessional and interprofessional groups

• No online component

• Negatives

• Logistics (finding rooms, parking, etc.)

• Would like more time

(19)

FACILITATOR FEEDBACK

• Positives

• Training session was effective

• Case study was appropriate

• Felt group interactions went well

• Negatives

• More time needed

• Finding rooms

(20)

STANDARDIZED PATIENT

FEEDBACK

• Very positive, felt students were appropriate

• Can be challenging to be interviewed by a group

(21)

ONGOING CHALLENGES

• Adapting facilitator training to every new issue • Different approaches to mental health

conceptualizations between disciplines • Scheduling for all disciplines

• Booking all the rooms, facilitators and standardized patients

• Evaluations: how much? How often?

• Ongoing meetings, assessment and adaptation by the interprofessional team

(22)

WHAT WE LEARNED

Listen to the feedback

• Students like simulation,

• Derive meaning from interprofessional contact

• They prefer face-to-face to online learning

Be ambitious

• We never thought we’d pull it off! Be adaptable

References

Related documents

o In locally advanced prostate cancer or for patients at risk of progression radiotherapy can be combined with GnRH agonists, before, during and after radiotherapy for a period of

We show that as the agent applies an increasingly stringent specification test, the large deviation properties of the discrete model validation dynamics converge to those of

section, securitized loans will have higher default rates conditional on observables since banks lower lending standards more in local areas that are more pro…table

[r]

If these documents are sent to non- FPO-exempt recipients, COBS 4 applies and the documents must comply with the MiFID regime for promoting to retail clients (this is a

In 2010 the most important strategic projects implemented in pGE cG included the pGE capital Group’s consolidation programme, the management of non-energy assets, a

Zmluva o viazanom spotrebiteľskom úvere je zmluva o spotrebiteľskom úvere, v ktorej sa dojednáva spotrebiteľský úver výhradne na financovanie zmluvy o kúpe konkrétneho

The AUC values for 25% testing data were very high in both cases (0.864 and 0.932 respectively), suggesting the models performed well to predict the distributions. When only