6 97 Interprofessional skills and motivation one year after IPE When comparing the UPE-group with the IPE group, the trajectory of the controlled motivation scores over time was significantly higher at T2 in the UPE students than in the IPE students. All others scores between the groups were not significantly different (Table 6.3, Figure 6.4). Table 6.3: Differences between the autonomous en controlled motivations scores compared to T1 in each group T2 vs T1 T3 vs T1 n(%) Beta [95%CI] p-value n(%) Beta [95%CI] p-value UPE 45(67%) 45(67%) Autonomous motivation -.09 [-.31 – .12] 0.391 -.15 [-.38 – .09] 0.223 Controlled motivation .23 [-.04 – .50] 0.097 .21 [-.09 – .51] 0.175 IPE 57(95%) 57(95%) Autonomous motivation -.21 [-.42 – -.01] 0.041 -.01 [-.27 – .25] 0.940 Controlled motivation -.23 [-.49 – .03] 0.085 .48 [.15 – .81] 0.004 Figure 6.4: Controlled and autonomous motivation for interprofessional collaboration in the UPE and IPE groups Motivation scores: Likert 1-5 ICCAS The response rate of the ICCAS was 46% (n=59). The age of the UPE-group was significantly higher (22 versus 20.5 years old) than that of the IPE-group. Gender and the proportion of nursing students was not significantly different between the
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw