131 - Student Perceptions Towards Interprofessional Education in Anatomy: Piloting a Universal Evaluation Tool

Poster Board Number: 131
There are separate poster presentation times for odd and even posters.
Odd poster #s – first hour
Even poster #s – second hour

Abstract Body : Introduction:
Interprofessional education (IPE) provides healthcare students the opportunity to adopt collaborative practices to facilitate effective patient care. At McMaster University, IPE courses are delivered to undergraduate and graduate health sciences learners to prepare them for post-graduate careers. While the delivery of IPE has been transferrable across multiple contexts, current modes of IPE evaluation are often too specific to the course and overlook important information regarding student feedback about interprofessional development, consequently limiting the transferability and utility of these evaluations. The primary objective of this research is to develop and pilot a universal Q-method IPE evaluation that can be administered to IPE courses in different contexts.

With a track-record of 14 years, the IPE Dissection Course is a longstanding and scholarly example of interprofessional and collaborative learning at McMaster University. The IPE Dissection Course at McMaster University is offered as an 8-week program where students from multiple health sciences programs deliver presentations on their scope of practice, discuss clinical case studies, and collectively perform cadaveric dissections with their peers. Given the collaborative nature of these activities, the IPE Dissection Course presents an opportunity to evaluate interprofessional skill development as the secondary objective of this research.

Methods and Results:
A Q-methodology survey was developed to explore student perceptions towards the IPE experience in attending the IPE Dissection Course. Domains of the National Interprofessional Competency Framework by the Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative was used to guide the construction of this IPE evaluation tool. A total of 87 preliminary statements (i.e., concourse) were initially considered, extracted from previous student feedback from past IPE courses and IPE literature. After multiple revisions with the research team, a consensus of 40 final statements were incorporated into the Q-methodology survey.

First-year students from the medical, nursing, midwifery, physician assistant, speech-language pathology, physiotherapy, and occupational therapy programs were invited to participate in this 8-week course. Students were asked to complete two 5-point Likert scale surveys before and after program completion: Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS), and Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS). Upon program completion, students were also asked to complete the Q-methodology survey by sorting the 40 statements about the IPE components of the course based on their importance and level of agreement/disagreement. These surveys were used to capture student IPE perceptions and learning experiences with their interdisciplinary co-learners during the course.

Conclusion and Significance:
This will be the first time a universal Q-method IPE evaluation tool is piloted at an IPE event. Validation of this tool is essential as this IPE evaluation tool could be applied to multiple IPE contexts in the future. Furthermore, student feedback will highlight the essential components of the IPE Program for Anatomy and identify areas for improvement to develop an effective course format for their interprofessional and anatomical expertise.