FINCA - a conceptual framework to improve interprofessional collaboration in health education and care.

The health care system in Germany and in many other countries is facing fundamental challenges due to demographic change, which require new integrated care concepts and a revision of the collaboration between health care professions in everyday clinical practice. Internationally, several competency framework models have been proposed, but a framework that explicitly conceptualizes collaborative activities to improve interprofessional problem-solving competency in health care is still missing. Such a framework should define contextual, person-related, process-related, and outcome-related variables relevant to interprofessional problem solving in health care. Against this background, we present a conceptual framework to improve interprofessional collaboration in health education and care (FINCA) developed with scientific consideration of empirical data and various theoretical references. FINCA reflects an interprofessional learning and interaction process involving two persons from different health care professions and with different individual learning prerequisites. These two initially identify a problem that is likely to require interprofessional collaboration at some point. FINCA acknowledges the context of interprofessional learning, teaching, and working as well as its action-modifying context factors. We follow the reasoning that individual learning prerequisites interact with the teaching context during learning activities. At the heart of FINCA are observable collaborative activities (information sharing and grounding; negotiating; regulating; executing interprofessional activities; maintaining communication) that can be used to assess individuals' cognitive and social skills. Eventually, the framework envisages an assessment of the outcomes of interprofessional education and collaboration. The proposed conceptual framework provides the basis for analysis and empirical testing of the components and variables it describes and their interactions across studies, educational interventions, and action-modifying contexts. FINCA further provides the basis for fostering the teaching and learning of interprofessional problem-solving skills in various health care settings. It can support faculty and curriculum developers to systematize the implementation and improvement of interprofessional teaching and learning opportunities. From a practical perspective, FINCA can help to better align curricula for different health professions in the future. In principle, we also see potential for transferability of the framework to other areas where different professions collaborate.

Writing for publication: increasing the likelihood of success.

The aim of this paper is to help writers at all levels improve their likelihood of success in having papers accepted by academic peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Interprofessional Care. We discuss the importance of reading both in your own discipline and also more widely across disciplines and fields of study. There are sections on the attributes of good authors, how to choose a journal, types of articles that are published and the structure of these, the contrast between research and evaluation, and how to plan a paper. We stress the importance of reading and complying with a journal's author guidelines and answering the 'so what' question by the end of the article. There is more detail about the main elements of a paper and what should be included in the introduction, methods, results (findings) and discussion to improve the quality of the reporting. As well as content we also focus on the style of writing. We finish with a discussion of the submission and review processes, why papers may be rejected and how to manage decisions on papers. Dissemination of scholarly work is paramount to the advancement of the interprofessional field; we invite authors to consider our advice and in so doing help strengthen the quality and rigor of interprofessional scholarship.

Global approaches to integrated care: Best practices and ongoing innovation.

The integration of behavioral health in primary care is critical for addressing worldwide concerns for access to, and quality of, health care services for physical and mental health promotion, prevention, and disease management. Clearly, promoting knowledge exchange internationally is critical to progress. In late 2015, the American Psychological Association convened an interdisciplinary summit on global approaches to integrated health care, bringing together 82 health care professionals (nurses, primary care physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, and social workers) and scholars from diverse disciplines in medicine, psychology, economics, health policy, public health, and demography; participants came from 10 countries. The Global Summit provided an opportunity to share best practices and innovation in patient-centered integrated health care internationally. In this article, Global Summit participants from different countries reflect on the recommendations for future interprofessional endeavors across the following themes: build international interprofessional communities for change; advocate for, and promote social equity with, a population health and patient focus; advance research and program evaluation in integrated care; advance interprofessional training and education in integrated care; and develop financially sustainable models for integrated primary care. Building upon these recommendations and reflecting on current advancement in health care policy and integrated care research, new directions are suggested for clinicians, researchers, administrators, and policymakers working toward the advancement of integrated care to improve health care services globally. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The times are changing: workforce planning, new health-care models and the need for interprofessional education in Australia.

Following a history of the Australian health system and funding models, we outline workforce issues, in particular, the lack of health professionals in regional locations. The role of the Australian government health departments in workforce planning is discussed. We describe research funded by the Commonwealth government focussing on the development of interprofessional education (IPE) for collaborative practice. New models of interprofessional care have been introduced to help tackle the population needs: in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT); HealthOne in New South Wales; health-care homes nationally; and partnerships between pharmacists and general practitioners in Victoria. Changes in care delivery necessitate innovations in health education, however how IPE is embedded in Australian health professional education still varies. There is a growing sense of an IPE community complemented by an interest in IPE from peak policy and workforce bodies. There are changes underway in health professional registration and accreditation that are likely to regulate shared and common learning to enable the continuous development of a flexible, responsive and sustainable health workforce. We conclude that there are significant opportunities for further development of IPE and collaborative practice as key strategies for adding to the ability of health systems to address individual needs in conjunction with aiming for optimal and universal health coverage.

Questions and answers in health care and education.

Questions and answers are integral to the practice of health professionals and their education. Health professionals are taught to ask questions and we expect that patients will answer them. We may also invite patients to ask questions without considering that this may be difficult due to many factors including professional hierarchies. Choosing Wisely is a global initiative that frames questions for patients to ask in relation to tests and treatments. The same concept has been applied to health professional education with students and trainees also being encouraged to question their seniors about their choice of investigations and management. Now is the time for learners to also question how they are educated for their health profession. Their education should be evidence-guided and not solely informed by tradition. Asking and answering questions with respect and honesty is likely to enhance partnerships across the continuum of health and education.

International consensus statement on the assessment of interprofessional learning outcomes.

Regulatory frameworks around the world mandate that health and social care professional education programs graduate practitioners who have the competence and capability to practice effectively in interprofessional collaborative teams. Academic institutions are responding by offering interprofessional education (IPE); however, there is as yet no consensus regarding optimal strategies for the assessment of interprofessional learning (IPL). The Program Committee for the 17th Ottawa Conference in Perth, Australia in March, 2016, invited IPE champions to debate and discuss the current status of the assessment of IPL. A draft statement from this workshop was further discussed at the global All Together Better Health VIII conference in Oxford, UK in September, 2016. The outcomes of these deliberations and a final round of electronic consultation informed the work of a core group of international IPE leaders to develop this document. The consensus statement we present here is the result of the synthesized views of experts and global colleagues. It outlines the challenges and difficulties but endorses a set of desired learning outcome categories and methods of assessment that can be adapted to individual contexts and resources. The points of consensus focus on pre-qualification (pre-licensure) health professional students but may be transferable into post-qualification arenas.

'It was serendipity': a qualitative study of academic careers in medical education.

CONTEXT: Despite a demand for educational expertise in medical universities, little is known of the roles of medical educators and the sustainability of academic careers in medical education. We examined the experiences and career paths of medical educators from diverse professional backgrounds seeking to establish, maintain and strengthen their careers in medical schools. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 44 lead and early-career medical educators from all 21 Australian and New Zealand medical schools. Questions explored career beginnings, rewards and challenges. Transcripts underwent systematic coding and independent thematic analysis. Final themes were confirmed by iterative review and member checking. Analysis was informed by Bourdieu's concepts of field (a social space for hierarchical interactions), habitus (individual dispositions which influence social interactions) and capital (economic, symbolic, social and cultural forms of power). RESULTS: Participants provided diverse accounts of what constitutes the practice of medical education. Serendipitous career entry and little commonality of professional backgrounds and responsibilities suggest an ambiguous habitus with ill-defined career pathways. Within the field of medicine as enacted in medical schools, educators have invisible yet essential roles, experiencing tension between service expectations, a lesser form of capital, and demands for more highly valued forms of scholarship. Participants reported increasing expectations to produce research and obtain postgraduate qualifications to enter and maintain their careers. Unable to draw upon cultural capital accrued from clinical work, non-clinician educators faced additional challenges. To strengthen their position, educators consciously built social capital through essential service relationships, capitalising on times when education takes precedence, such as curriculum renewal and accreditation. CONCLUSIONS: Bourdieu's theory provides insight into medical educator career paths and the positioning of medical education within medical schools. Medical educators have an indistinct practice, and limited cultural capital in the form of research outputs. In order to maintain and strengthen their careers, educators must create alternative sources of capital, through fostering collaborative alliances.

Interprofessional education: implications and development for medical education / Educación interprofesional: implicaciones y desarrollo para la educación médica

This paper considers the development, delivery and implications of interprofessional education (IPE) using a 4-dimensional curriculum development framework. This framework involves: considering curricula for the education of the workforce of the twenty-first century and the rationale for IPE; defining learning outcomes taking into account national and professional accreditation standards; learning activities and assessment; and institutional support

En este artículo se aborda el desarrollo, la prestación y las implicaciones de la educación interprofesional (EIP) utilizando un marco de desarrollo curricular cuatridimensional. Este marco incluye: la consideración de los planes de estudios para la educación de la plantilla del siglo XXI y el fundamento de la EIP; la definición de los resultados de aprendizaje teniendo en cuenta las normas de acreditación nacionales y profesionales; las actividades de aprendizaje y evaluación, y el apoyo institucional

Interprofessional education and the basic sciences: Rationale and outcomes.

Interprofessional education (IPE) aims to improve patient outcomes and the quality of care. Interprofessional learning outcomes and interprofessional competencies are now included in many countries' health and social care professions' accreditation standards. While IPE may take place at any time in health professions curricula it tends to focus on professionalism and clinical topics rather than basic science activities. However generic interprofessional competencies could be included in basic science courses that are offered to at least two different professional groups. In developing interprofessional activities at the preclinical level, it is important to define explicit interprofessional learning outcomes plus the content and process of the learning. Interprofessional education must involve interactive learning processes and integration of theory and practice. This paper provides examples of IPE in anatomy and makes recommendations for course development and evaluation.

Competencies and frameworks in interprofessional education: a comparative analysis.

Health professionals need preparation and support to work in collaborative practice teams, a requirement brought about by an aging population and increases in chronic and complex diseases. Therefore, health professions education has seen the introduction of interprofessional education (IPE) competency frameworks to provide a common lens through which disciplines can understand, describe, and implement team-based practices. Whilst an admirable aim, often this has resulted in more confusion with the introduction of varying definitions about similar constructs, particularly in relation to what IPE actually means.The authors explore the nature of the terms competency and framework, while critically appraising the concept of competency frameworks and competency-based education. They distinguish between competencies for health professions that are profession specific, those that are generic, and those that may be achieved only through IPE. Four IPE frameworks are compared to consider their similarities and differences, which ultimately influence how IPE is implemented. They are the Interprofessional Capability Framework (United Kingdom), the National Interprofessional Competency Framework (Canada), the Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice (United States), and the Curtin University Interprofessional Capability Framework (Australia).The authors highlight the need for further discussion about establishing a common language, strengthening ways in which academic environments work with practice environments, and improving the assessment of interprofessional competencies and teamwork, including the development of assessment tools for collaborative practice. They also argue that for IPE frameworks to be genuinely useful, they need to augment existing curricula by emphasizing outcomes that might be attained only through interprofessional activity.

Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?

BACKGROUND: Revalidation for UK doctors is expected to be introduced from late 2012. For general practitioners (GPs), this entails collecting supporting information to be submitted and assessed in a revalidation portfolio every five years. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of GPs working in secure environments to collect supporting information for the Royal College of General Practitioners' (RCGP) proposed revalidation portfolio. METHODS: We invited GPs working in secure environments in England to submit items of supporting information collected during the previous 12 months using criteria and standards required for the proposed RCGP revalidation portfolio and complete a GP issues log. Initial focus groups and initial and follow-up semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews were held to explore GPs' views of this process. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and identifying themes respectively. RESULTS: Of the 50 GPs who consented to participate in the study, 20 submitted a portfolio. Thirty-eight GPs participated in an initial interview, nine took part in a follow-up interview and 17 completed a GP issues log. GPs reported difficulty in collecting supporting information for valid patient feedback, full-cycle clinical audits and evidence for their extended practice role(s) as sessional practitioners in the high population turnover custodial environment. Peripatetic practitioners experienced more difficulty than their institution based counterparts collating this evidence. CONCLUSIONS: GPs working in secure environments may experience difficulties in collecting the newer types of supporting information for the proposed RCGP revalidation portfolio primarily due to their employment status within a non-medical environment and characteristics of the detainee population. Increased support from secure environment service commissioners and employers will be a prerequisite for these practitioners to enable them to re-license using the RCGP revalidation proposals.