4 67 How does IPE influence students’ perceptions of collaboration? ‘I don’t know if it sounds a bit funny, but (I take with me) that they also would like to help you. Sometimes doctors have a higher… that maybe sounds a bit… but sometimes it really is like that. Especially with surgeons, they can really come across as intimidating. But actually, (…) they are just people our age. And they aren’t per se higher, they just want to help if you are struggling’. (Student no.19-nursing) 4. Improvement in patient care Some students highlighted the improvement in patients’ well-being as an effect of the IPE. The way patients benefit according to the students is by reducing the hierarchy (Theme 3) or professionals knowing each other’s responsibilities (Theme 2). The way this theme differs from the other two is that patients’ wellbeing is specifically pointed out, and the other factors are used to justify the statement. ‘That the vision of us as a doctor, is not the only side of the story, and also not the best care for the patient per se. That there are more different points of care. We maybe order a blood test, additional medical examination, or antibiotics treatment, and I’ve noticed that nurses often think about bringing in a social worker or physical therapist, or how the patient will return home after this. So more broadly, seeing the picture of the patient. Also the social part’. (Student no.10-medical) This improvement in patient care is what is described in social capital theory as ‘getting ahead’: the care for patients is improving because of the benefits of enlarged social capital the students experience after IPE. The four themes described above reflect bridging and linking social capital. Bonding social capital did not appear in our interviews. Barriers and facilitators to IPC In addition to the influence of the IPE sessions, students also spontaneously talked about other factors that facilitated or hindered IPC in clinical practice. In the literature, these factors are often referred to as ‘barriers and facilitators’ to IPC (Olde Bekkink et al., 2018; Visser et al., 2017). Some factors in this study were explained as both a barrier and facilitator, depending on the situation in which it occurred. All factors could be ordered into four themes: Perceived hierarchy, organisational factors, personal characteristics, and the feeling of responsibility for a patient. Table 4.1 depicts the four themes, all corresponding factors, if the factor was indicated as barrier or facilitator, and an exemplary quote for each factor.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw