Olson Rebecca, Bialocerkowski Andrea
School of Science and Health, University of Western Sydney, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.
Med Educ. 2014 Mar;48(3):236-46. doi: 10.1111/medu.12290.
During the past decade, several studies have systematically reviewed interprofessional education (IPE), but few have inclusively reviewed this literature. None has focused primarily on IPE in allied health, despite differences in recruitment and socialisation across the health professions. This systematic review seeks to uncover the best approach to pre-licensure, university-based allied health IPE to determine which aspects require modification in which contexts to provide optimal learning experiences.
A systematic search of 10 databases was conducted for articles published in English, between January 1998 and January 2013. Studies were included if they used quantitative or qualitative methodologies to report on the outcomes associated with IPE in allied health. Two independent reviewers identified studies that met the inclusion criteria, critically appraised the included studies and extracted data relating to the effectiveness of IPE in allied health. Data were synthesised narratively to address the study aims.
Large gaps - relating to methods, theory and context - remain within this body of literature. Studies measured students' attitudes and understanding of other health professional roles, teamwork and knowledge in response to IPE interventions using patient scenarios, lectures and small-group work. Differences in power and curriculum placement were described as factors affecting IPE effectiveness.
Evaluation remains the primary aim within this literature. Few studies use theory, take an inductive approach to understanding the processes behind IPE or include detailed participant descriptions. Therefore, we suggest that IPE research is currently caught in an epistemological struggle, between assumptions underpinning biomedical and health science research, and those underpinning education studies. As part of a systems approach to understanding interprofessional socialisation, we call for researchers to take a realistic approach to evaluation that is inclusive of, and responsive to, contextual factors to explore how IPE leads to improved long-term outcomes in differing circumstances.
在过去十年中，已有多项研究对跨专业教育（IPE）进行了系统综述，但全面涵盖该文献的研究较少。尽管各卫生专业在招生和社会化方面存在差异，但尚无研究主要聚焦于联合健康领域的IPE。本系统综述旨在探寻联合健康领域基于大学的执照前IPE的最佳方法，以确定在何种背景下哪些方面需要改进，从而提供最佳学习体验。
对10个数据库进行系统检索，查找1998年1月至2013年1月期间发表的英文文章。若研究采用定量或定性方法报告联合健康领域IPE相关结果，则纳入研究。两名独立评审员确定符合纳入标准的研究，严格评估纳入研究，并提取与联合健康领域IPE有效性相关的数据。对数据进行叙述性综合分析以实现研究目的。
该文献体系在方法、理论和背景方面仍存在较大差距。研究通过患者案例、讲座和小组作业等IPE干预措施，测量学生对其他卫生专业角色、团队合作和知识的态度及理解。权力差异和课程设置被描述为影响IPE有效性的因素。
评估仍是该文献的主要目标。很少有研究运用理论，采用归纳法理解IPE背后的过程，或纳入详细的参与者描述。因此，我们认为IPE研究目前陷入了一场认识论斗争，介于生物医学和健康科学研究的假设与教育研究的假设之间。作为理解跨专业社会化系统方法的一部分，我们呼吁研究人员采用切实可行的评估方法，纳入并回应背景因素，以探索IPE如何在不同情况下带来长期改善结果。
