122 Appendix SUMMARY The aim of this thesis was to investigate the short-term and long-term impact of a small-scale interprofessional education intervention on the interprofessional collaboration skills, perceptions and motivation of nursing and medical students. The knowledge from this dissertation contributes to the evidence of IPE on different educational levels and can facilitate the implementation and shaping of IPE initiatives. The introduction (Chapter 1) provides a rationale for the research conducted. Interprofessional Education (IPE) is essential to prepare students for interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in clinical practice. The aim of this dissertation was to add to the literature on IPE effectiveness. This research was conducted in the context of IPE for undergraduate medical and nursing students. The broad research question for this thesis was: What is the short-term and long-term impact of a small-scale interprofessional education intervention on the interprofessional collaboration skills, perceptions and motivation of nursing and medical students? The basis for all studies was a student (medical and nursing) population without prior interprofessional training experience, which underwent an IPE or uniprofessional education (UPE) intervention. All students attended four sessions IPE or UPE over the period of one year. During each session the students wrote a health care plan for a paper-based geriatric patient case. Students were asked to draw up a health care plan ‘like they would in clinical practice’. In the UPE group, students wrote their health care plans on their own. In the IPE group, the health care plans were written by randomly paired medical and nursing students. Before, directly after, and one year after the 4-session intervention the students filled out different questionnaires to answer our research questions. In the second chapter of this dissertation, we have described a six-step process to create and validate the patient cases needed for the IPE and UPE sessions. To construct these cases, input from experts in clinical practice is essential. Consensus between these experts was facilitated using consensus methods. By combining the three most commonly used consensus methods, a six-step approach was developed to validate cases for IPE. The six steps included three expert rounds (Steps 1, 3 and 5) and two rounds in which discussion points were formulated by the researcher (Steps 2 and 4). In Step 6 the cases were piloted with students. Four facets of a case were included: the patient description, the complemented treatment plan, the difficulty of the case and the scoring of the treatment plan. While consensus about the patient descriptions and difficulty levels was reached easily, consensus between the clinical experts on the treatment plans was more difficult to achieve.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw