Teaching respiratory therapeutics through shared learning: exploring the effects of an inter-professional educational intervention for undergraduate healthcare professionals

S. Amadesi¹, D. T. Grant². ¹Pharmacology, University of Reading, School of Pharmacy, Reading, United Kingdom, ²Pharmacy Practice, University of Reading, School of Pharmacy, Reading, United Kingdom.

Background and aims: Inter-professional education activities (IPEa) and shared learning encourage collaborative practice, and develop communication and team-working skills, whilst promoting knowledge of specific topics¹; all invaluable components of effective, integrated and high-quality healthcare². The perception of IPEa in pharmacy academics has been analysed²; however, there is a lack of evidence regarding the perceived effects of IPEa among pharmacy students, and whether therapeutic knowledge is enhanced by such approaches. This study investigated how pharmacy (P-Stu, 120, level 5) and nursing (N-Stu, 70, level 6) students perceived IPEa, and the general benefit of these activities.

Summary of work and outcomes: A 4 hour IPEa consisting of an ice-breaker, followed by practice- and scenario-based activities was organised. Written comments collected from the ice-breaker were used to explore students’ initial expectations. A feedback survey including open questions and five-level Likert scale was distributed at the end to gather students’ perception of the experience. The feedback was assessed by Likert scale, and thematic analysis³ of comments with expression as % of total responses. Thematic mapping of comments relating to students’ ‘perceptions’, differed from their initial expectations. ‘Therapeutics’ and ‘Medical Devices’ themes, major foci for P-Stu (35% and 23% of responses), were initially limited among N-Stu’s responses (11% and 2%) but increased after IPEa (26% and 16%). ‘Practice-related knowledge’, almost absent among P-Stu’s expectations (5%), appeared after IPEa (20%). Additionally, perceptions of collaborative ‘roles’, completely absent from earlier discussions, after IPEa became a major theme across both groups (P-Stu, 24% and N-Stu, 31%). P-Stu generally found IPEa less beneficial than N-Stu and 10% of P-Stu did not enjoy working in an inter-professional team.

Discussion: IPEa enhanced therapeutics- and practice-related knowledge, and improved attitudes toward collaborative practice. Whether benefits of this intervention persist during later years has not been investigated. The limited awareness that P-Stu have of pharmacists’ roles and their limited contact with the working environment may account for the less positive attitude of P-Stu toward IPEa¹.

Conclusion: IPEa are excellent tools to promote students’ knowledge of therapeutics and awareness of other professionals. It is possible that P-Stu’s attitude toward IPEa improves at later stages of study (>level 5) when P-Stu develop their own identity, to effectively relate to nurses and engage in multiprofessional activities.

References:

1. Leaviss J (2000). Medical Education  34:483-6.

2. Patel N et al. (2016). Pharmacy, 4: 28.

3. Braun V. and Clarke V (2006). Qualitative Research in Psychology 3: 77-101.