Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Clinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Med Educ. 2021 Jul;55(7):795-807. doi: 10.1111/medu.14453. Epub 2021 Feb 15.
Interprofessional education (IPE) aims to provide students with the opportunity to develop and demonstrate the team working behaviours and skills that will lead to positive patient outcomes. This systematic review aims to identify and critically appraise the assessment tools used after a pre-licensure IPE intervention and provide guidance on which tool to use according to the focus of the intervention.
In July 2019, the following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, ERIC, CINHAL, EMBASE and NEXUS website. All studies involving pre-licensure health care students exposed to an IPE intervention and undertook an assessment measuring student knowledge, skills, behaviour, or change in organisational practice or a benefit to patients were included. Studies that used tools relying on self-assessment only were excluded. Constructive alignment of the IPE intervention with the assessment was evaluated and quality assessment of the studies and critical appraisal of the validity evidence for the tools was undertaken.
From 9502 returned studies, 39 studies met the inclusion criteria and were analysed. These were rated as good in terms of methodological quality. Acquisition of knowledge was the most commonly assessed outcome, mainly with pre/post knowledge tests, followed by behaviour change, which was measured by a range of validated tools. Patient benefit was defined as change in clinical effectiveness, patient safety or patient satisfaction. Constructive alignment of the IPE aim with the assessment was limited due to issues with study reporting. Tools measuring behaviour change demonstrate mixed adherence to quality standards around reliability, validity and scales and scoring.
Various methods have been used to identify change following IPE; however, choosing the most appropriate tool to support and align with the aim of the IPE intervention is crucial. We have critically appraised the available tools and offered an indication of their quality. This has informed the production of a decision aid to support the selection of the appropriate IPE assessment tool depending on the purpose of the intervention. More studies using these tools in rigorous study designs are required to substantiate the evidence base.
以团队工作行为和技能为导向的跨专业教育（IPE）旨在为学生提供机会，从而取得积极的患者结果。本系统评价旨在确定和批判性评价在许可前 IPE 干预后使用的评估工具，并根据干预的重点提供使用哪种工具的指导。
2019 年 7 月，检索了以下电子数据库：MEDLINE、ERIC、CINHAL、EMBASE 和 NEXUS 网站。所有涉及接受 IPE 干预并进行评估的许可前医疗保健学生的研究均包括在内，评估衡量学生的知识、技能、行为或组织实践的变化，或对患者的益处。仅使用自我评估工具的研究被排除在外。对 IPE 干预与评估的建设性对齐进行了评估，并对研究的质量进行了评估，并对工具的有效性证据进行了批判性评价。
从 9502 项返回的研究中，有 39 项研究符合纳入标准并进行了分析。这些研究在方法学质量方面被评为良好。知识获取是最常见的评估结果，主要是通过前后知识测试，其次是行为变化，通过一系列经过验证的工具进行衡量。患者获益被定义为临床效果、患者安全或患者满意度的变化。由于研究报告存在问题，IPE 目标与评估的建设性对齐受到限制。衡量行为变化的工具在可靠性、有效性和量表及评分方面的质量标准存在差异。
已经使用了各种方法来确定 IPE 后的变化；然而，选择最适合支持和与 IPE 干预目标保持一致的工具是至关重要的。我们对现有工具进行了批判性评价，并提供了其质量的指示。这为生产决策辅助工具提供了信息，以根据干预目的选择适当的 IPE 评估工具。需要更多使用这些工具进行严格研究设计的研究来证实证据基础。
