What characterize high and low achieving teams in Interprofessional education: A self-determination theory perspective.

OBJECTIVES

Calls to promote team-based interprofessional collaborative practice in managing patients with complex health problems are ubiquitous. However, the literature remains silent on what characterises successful teams in interprofessional education (IPE) and on profiling successful teams. To help conceptualise successful teams, this study investigated the differences in attitudes and achievement between high- and low-performing teams in an online asynchronous and synchronous IPE programme, and the role of autonomous motivation in determining team membership.

METHODS

Using extreme case sampling involving health and social care students, we identified ten high-performing teams and seven low-performing teams based on their team composite scores on three interprofessional collaborative outcomes: team effectiveness, goal achievement, and scores on the readiness assurance test. Each team had five to seven members of diverse backgrounds. Independent t-tests were performed to identify differences in interprofessional collaborative outcomes, namely teamwork and collaboration, patient-centredness, diversity and ethics, community-centeredness, and interprofessional biases for the affective domain and application exercise for the cognitive domain. We employed logistic regression in which autonomous motivation was used to predict group membership.

RESULTS

High-performing teams were characterised as those whose members endorsed or valued "teamwork and collaboration" in IPE simulations. Compared with the low-performing groups, they better recognised and endorsed diversity and ethics, patient-centeredness, and community-centeredness. Membership to high- and low-performing teams was linked to autonomous motivation.

CONCLUSIONS

High-performing teams have higher favourable valuing of important interprofessional collaborative competencies, and membership to which is predicted by autonomous motivation. The results suggest the need to pay special attention to struggling teams to facilitate desirable collaborative competencies, especially in terms of members' motivation. Theoretical, methodological, and practical implications are discussed.