2 27 The validation of geriatric cases for IPE Table 2.1: Aspects of the different consensus methods. DT NGP CDP a Experts in the field √ √ √ b Diverse experts √ √ √ c Every expert only once √ d Formulation of discussion points by researcher(s) √ e Number of experts 5–9 5–10 6–11 f Rounds >1 4 Var. g (Partly) open first round √ h Face-to-face meeting by experts √ √ Note: Delphi Technique: DT; Nominal Group Process: NGP; Consensus Development Panel: CDP The objective of the present study was to use consensus methods to construct and validate patient cases that are suitable for IPE in undergraduate nursing and medical education. We chose a geriatric focus for our cases because of the different professions involved in caring for geriatric patients. IPC between these different stakeholders is important for adhering to a good standard for the quality of care (Tsakitzidis et al., 2016). Furthermore while there has been a substantial increase in the number of elderly patients in the countries in northern and western Europe, few medical students are interested in working with these patients (Meiboom et al., 2015). It has been reported that geriatric IPE programs help motivate students to work with geriatric patients, since students are able to expand their knowledge, and deliberate with each other about geriatric problems (McManus et al., 2017). METHODS The six steps based on the consensus methods To reach consensus about and validate the content of the cases, we used a combination of the three consensus methods. We did this because none of the methods covered all the aspects that are relevant to the construction of cases. We chose the best aspects and the aspects that are most applicable to this research topic. Table 2.2 provides justification for these different aspects, and how and why they were implemented in our study.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw