- Email: [email protected]
Linking Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice through TeamSTEPPS®
76
Abstracts / Journal of Interprofessional Education & Practice 1 (2015) 48e77
variables were evaluated using cross-tabular analyses and the chi-square test of independence. Results The data reveals that, in past medical encounters, 79.5% of fathers (N¼46) had been called Dad or Daddy and 90% of mothers (N¼91) had been called Mom or Mommy. Fathers preferred the title Dad over Daddy, Sir, or no name (69.8%, 14%, 9.3%, and 7% respectively). Mothers preferred the title Mom over Mommy, Ma'am, or no name (79.8%, 7.1%, 6%, and 7.1% respectively). Only 7% of fathers dislike the title Dad; however, many dislike being addressed as Daddy, Sir, or without a name (24.4% 32.7% and 48.5% respectively). Only 1.2% of mothers dislike the title Mom; however many dislike being addressed as Mommy, Ma'am, or without a name (19.8%, 46.4%, and 64% respectively). These results were consistent across the population demographics surveyed. Only small subsets achieved statistical significance.
Conclusions Patients prefer to be addressed by their name; however, our data demonstrate that most parents recall medical staff addressing them by generic parent titles (Mom, Mommy, Dad, Daddy). No prior studies evaluated which generic title is most acceptable to parents. Our results suggest that parents of Pediatric patients prefer to be called Mom or Dad over other generic titles. The majority of parents dislike being addressed by medical staff without a name or title. Many parents also dislike being addressed as Mommy/Daddy or Ma'am/Sir. LINKING INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION PRACTICE THROUGH TEAMSTEPPS®
AND
COLLABORATIVE
Holly H. Wise PT, PhD, Mary P. Mauldin EdD, Kelly Ragucci PharmD, Terri Fowler DNP, APRN, FNP-C, Zemin Su MS, MAS, Jingwen Zhang MS, Jill Mauldin MD, Danielle Scheurer MD, MSCR, Jeffrey Borckardt PhD.
Background/Introduction After six years of implementing and evaluating numerous interprofessional (IP) initiatives for students in all six colleges at the Medical University of South Carolina, we were uncertain if our students had acquired the skills necessary for collaborative practice or if our efforts had improved any one of the three dimensions identified by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Triple Aim. In collaboration with the National Center for Interprofessional Practice and Education, we enlisted the help of administration, faculty, students and staff from both the academic and practice settings to design a rigorous system using evidence-based TeamSTEPPS® concepts to implement and evaluate IP team training in an inpatient clinical setting. Embedding TeamSTEPPS® into IP curricula provides students with a skill set that is widely used in practice, helps to link IP education and practice, and ultimately may lead to improvements in delivery of healthcare. Methods During the summer of 2014, an IP group of 21 students completed an elective course based on the Fundamentals of TeamSTEPPS® curriculum. The students practiced observing and rating videotaped team behaviors using the Team Performance Observation Tool. Once each student attained reliability with videotape ratings, they observed and rated team behaviors in the clinical setting. The IP clinical teams then completed a TeamSTEPPS® training program. The students observed and re-rated team behaviors immediately post intervention. Because of design limitations, a partially matched (unbalanced) repeated measures pre-post analysis was performed to determine statistical significance of team behaviors as well as clinical outcomes. Currently an IP group of 57 students are piloting TeamSTEPPS® training as a component of a required IP course for all MUSC students. 31 students will complete the 3-month follow-up observations and 26 will complete the 6-month follow-up observations. Future plans are to continue to evaluate the impact of TeamSTEPPS® training on behaviors and clinical outcomes at 9 months and 12 months post intervention. The long-term goal is for students to develop skills in effective team behaviors, increase their ability to recognize effective (and ineffective) team behaviors, and demonstrate competence in collaborative practice while meeting the needs of our clinical partners.
Results Preliminary findings indicate that the students observed significant changes in behaviors associated with communication and leadership but not with team structure, situation monitoring, or mutual support in the initial post-intervention observation. Course evaluations found 100% of the students agreed or strongly agreed that their teamwork skills improved and that interactions with students from other professions contributed to their learning.
Conclusions This IP program was feasible to implement and evaluate. Training students in TeamSTEPPS® provides them with a strong foundation in teamwork and provides opportunities to simulate and observe teams in practice settings and identify facilitators/ barriers to best practice. Teamwork training in the clinical setting objectively improved leadership and communication behaviors. Future plans are to continue to evaluate the impact of TeamSTEPPS® training on behaviors and outcomes in the clinical setting, including metrics related to the patient experience of care. ENGAGING MEDICAL STUDENTS AND FAMILIES OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES IN PATIENT-CENTERED EDUCATION C.S. Zhang, X. Mi, J. Tsuei, S.W. Chung, H. Rashid, E. Janks, J. Mendez.
Background and Purpose The curriculum at Wayne State University School of Medicine provides some exposure to children with developmental disabilities, but opportunities for one-on-one interaction with these children and their families are limited. Since medical students will inevitably encounter and treat children with developmental disabilities, it is crucial to assess medical students' perceptions and attitudes towards this population and provide them with opportunities to learn how to interact effectively with children with developmental disabilities and liaison with the families to formulate the best plan of care. Methods This ongoing pilot study involved 40 YR1 and YR2 medical students and 20 families who have a child with a developmental disability. First, students attended a required orientation and completed the Medical Students' Perceptions of Disability (MSPD) Pre-Assessment. Then, they called the families and scheduled the first visit during which students completed the “Beach Family Quality of Life Assessment” (FQOL) with the family and discussed ways to improve quality of life. The students also provided a list of resources and formulated a plan with the family to provide better care for the child. A month later, the students called the family to ask if the resources were helpful or if additional resources were required. The format of the second visit was identical to the first. The students and family also discussed improvements and changes that would provide for more comprehensive care to the child. Lastly, the students were required to complete the MSPD Post-Assessment. Results For the MSPD Assessment, the significance values for assessment of clinical skills confidence, comfort interacting with disabled patients, and negative impressions of people with disabilities were 0.000334, 0.00127, and 0.000624, respectively (p<0.05). For the 5 FQOL Categories Family Interaction, Parenting, Emotional WellBeing, Physical/Material Well-Being, and Disability-Related Support the significance values were 0.00178, 0.00673, 0.0786, 0.0561, and 0.195 respectively (p<0.05).
Conclusions Results showed that families were less satisfied with their quality of life after program completion, with the Family Interaction and Parenting categories yielding significant results. This was probably due to the family’s expectations that medical students would provide medical and clinical interventions; however, our program was designed to address the psychosocial and economical aspects of caring for a child
Abstracts / Journal of Interprofessional Education & Practice 1 (2015) 48e77
variables were evaluated using cross-tabular analyses and the chi-square test of independence. Results The data reveals that, in past medical encounters, 79.5% of fathers (N¼46) had been called Dad or Daddy and 90% of mothers (N¼91) had been called Mom or Mommy. Fathers preferred the title Dad over Daddy, Sir, or no name (69.8%, 14%, 9.3%, and 7% respectively). Mothers preferred the title Mom over Mommy, Ma'am, or no name (79.8%, 7.1%, 6%, and 7.1% respectively). Only 7% of fathers dislike the title Dad; however, many dislike being addressed as Daddy, Sir, or without a name (24.4% 32.7% and 48.5% respectively). Only 1.2% of mothers dislike the title Mom; however many dislike being addressed as Mommy, Ma'am, or without a name (19.8%, 46.4%, and 64% respectively). These results were consistent across the population demographics surveyed. Only small subsets achieved statistical significance.
Conclusions Patients prefer to be addressed by their name; however, our data demonstrate that most parents recall medical staff addressing them by generic parent titles (Mom, Mommy, Dad, Daddy). No prior studies evaluated which generic title is most acceptable to parents. Our results suggest that parents of Pediatric patients prefer to be called Mom or Dad over other generic titles. The majority of parents dislike being addressed by medical staff without a name or title. Many parents also dislike being addressed as Mommy/Daddy or Ma'am/Sir. LINKING INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION PRACTICE THROUGH TEAMSTEPPS®
AND
COLLABORATIVE
Holly H. Wise PT, PhD, Mary P. Mauldin EdD, Kelly Ragucci PharmD, Terri Fowler DNP, APRN, FNP-C, Zemin Su MS, MAS, Jingwen Zhang MS, Jill Mauldin MD, Danielle Scheurer MD, MSCR, Jeffrey Borckardt PhD.
Background/Introduction After six years of implementing and evaluating numerous interprofessional (IP) initiatives for students in all six colleges at the Medical University of South Carolina, we were uncertain if our students had acquired the skills necessary for collaborative practice or if our efforts had improved any one of the three dimensions identified by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Triple Aim. In collaboration with the National Center for Interprofessional Practice and Education, we enlisted the help of administration, faculty, students and staff from both the academic and practice settings to design a rigorous system using evidence-based TeamSTEPPS® concepts to implement and evaluate IP team training in an inpatient clinical setting. Embedding TeamSTEPPS® into IP curricula provides students with a skill set that is widely used in practice, helps to link IP education and practice, and ultimately may lead to improvements in delivery of healthcare. Methods During the summer of 2014, an IP group of 21 students completed an elective course based on the Fundamentals of TeamSTEPPS® curriculum. The students practiced observing and rating videotaped team behaviors using the Team Performance Observation Tool. Once each student attained reliability with videotape ratings, they observed and rated team behaviors in the clinical setting. The IP clinical teams then completed a TeamSTEPPS® training program. The students observed and re-rated team behaviors immediately post intervention. Because of design limitations, a partially matched (unbalanced) repeated measures pre-post analysis was performed to determine statistical significance of team behaviors as well as clinical outcomes. Currently an IP group of 57 students are piloting TeamSTEPPS® training as a component of a required IP course for all MUSC students. 31 students will complete the 3-month follow-up observations and 26 will complete the 6-month follow-up observations. Future plans are to continue to evaluate the impact of TeamSTEPPS® training on behaviors and clinical outcomes at 9 months and 12 months post intervention. The long-term goal is for students to develop skills in effective team behaviors, increase their ability to recognize effective (and ineffective) team behaviors, and demonstrate competence in collaborative practice while meeting the needs of our clinical partners.
Results Preliminary findings indicate that the students observed significant changes in behaviors associated with communication and leadership but not with team structure, situation monitoring, or mutual support in the initial post-intervention observation. Course evaluations found 100% of the students agreed or strongly agreed that their teamwork skills improved and that interactions with students from other professions contributed to their learning.
Conclusions This IP program was feasible to implement and evaluate. Training students in TeamSTEPPS® provides them with a strong foundation in teamwork and provides opportunities to simulate and observe teams in practice settings and identify facilitators/ barriers to best practice. Teamwork training in the clinical setting objectively improved leadership and communication behaviors. Future plans are to continue to evaluate the impact of TeamSTEPPS® training on behaviors and outcomes in the clinical setting, including metrics related to the patient experience of care. ENGAGING MEDICAL STUDENTS AND FAMILIES OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES IN PATIENT-CENTERED EDUCATION C.S. Zhang, X. Mi, J. Tsuei, S.W. Chung, H. Rashid, E. Janks, J. Mendez.
Background and Purpose The curriculum at Wayne State University School of Medicine provides some exposure to children with developmental disabilities, but opportunities for one-on-one interaction with these children and their families are limited. Since medical students will inevitably encounter and treat children with developmental disabilities, it is crucial to assess medical students' perceptions and attitudes towards this population and provide them with opportunities to learn how to interact effectively with children with developmental disabilities and liaison with the families to formulate the best plan of care. Methods This ongoing pilot study involved 40 YR1 and YR2 medical students and 20 families who have a child with a developmental disability. First, students attended a required orientation and completed the Medical Students' Perceptions of Disability (MSPD) Pre-Assessment. Then, they called the families and scheduled the first visit during which students completed the “Beach Family Quality of Life Assessment” (FQOL) with the family and discussed ways to improve quality of life. The students also provided a list of resources and formulated a plan with the family to provide better care for the child. A month later, the students called the family to ask if the resources were helpful or if additional resources were required. The format of the second visit was identical to the first. The students and family also discussed improvements and changes that would provide for more comprehensive care to the child. Lastly, the students were required to complete the MSPD Post-Assessment. Results For the MSPD Assessment, the significance values for assessment of clinical skills confidence, comfort interacting with disabled patients, and negative impressions of people with disabilities were 0.000334, 0.00127, and 0.000624, respectively (p<0.05). For the 5 FQOL Categories Family Interaction, Parenting, Emotional WellBeing, Physical/Material Well-Being, and Disability-Related Support the significance values were 0.00178, 0.00673, 0.0786, 0.0561, and 0.195 respectively (p<0.05).
Conclusions Results showed that families were less satisfied with their quality of life after program completion, with the Family Interaction and Parenting categories yielding significant results. This was probably due to the family’s expectations that medical students would provide medical and clinical interventions; however, our program was designed to address the psychosocial and economical aspects of caring for a child