Interprofessional education & learning: Optimising the future primary health care workforce

workforce shortages and the ageing population with increasing levels of long-term chronic, complex and multiple conditions. Multidisciplinary, interprofessional and multi-professional team based approaches are promoted as solutions within primary health care service delivery. This raises the need to reflect upon the health, educational, regulatory and financial systems that currently exist, and how they promote or hinder opportunities for learning and working together in teams. This report describes the outcomes of Professor Debra Humphris�s visit as part of the APHCRI International Visiting Fellowship Program. The report includes key themes emerging from Professor Humphris�s presentations (see Appendix 1) and roundtable discussions (see Appendix 2) held during her visit from 3�7 August 2009. The report also provides implications for APHCRI�s primary health care strategic work program.The research reported in this paper is a project of the Australian Primary Health Care Research Institute which is supported by a grant from the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing under the Primary Health Care Research Evaluation and Development Strategy

Interprofessional education: a UK perspective

To review the development of interprofessional education (IPE) in the United Kingdom (UK) it is necessary to appreciate that the UK is made up of four countries: Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England each with its own health and education policy although health professions are currently regulated at the UK level. For all four countries, meeting future health and social care needs is a critical need that will require the development and introduction of new roles in and across health and social care, new ways of working and as a consequence changes to the kind, content and delivery of education and training. The development and implementation of IPE in the UK therefore requires not only strategic cross-profession agreements but also understanding of the differing labour market challenges and realities within and between the four UK countries.It is evident that some progress has been made across the UK at a pre-qualifying level with the development of common learning for students from a range of health and social care professions. Programmes for qualified staff often aim to attract participants from a range of disciplines. However despite concerted efforts IPE appears still be somewhat on the margins and evidence of impact is difficult to find at scale.Rather than promoting IPE or not, maybe the questions for the next decade should be: what are the health and social care needs, what are the skills required to do this work, what therefore should the workforce look like and how should it be prepared. As Wanless (2002) noted “although the number of health care professionals is important for the capacity of the system, arguably the way the workforce is used is even more important

Will opposites attract? Similarities and differences in students' perceptions of the stereotype profiles of other health and social care professional groups

The extent to which health and social care (HSC) students hold stereotypical views of other HSC professional groups is of great potential importance to team working in health care. This paper explores students' perceptions of different HSC professional groups at the beginning of their university programmes. Findings are presented from an analysis of baseline data collected as part of the New Generation Project longitudinal cohort study which is assessing the impact of interprofessional education over time on a range of variables including stereotyping. Questionnaires were administered to a cohort of over 1200 students from 10 different HSC professional groups entering their first year of university. Stereotypes were measured using a tool adapted from Barnes et al. (2000) designed to elicit stereotype ratings on a range of nine characteristics. The findings confirm that students arrive at university with an established and consistent set of stereotypes about other health and social care professional groups. Stereotypical profiles were compiled for each professional group indicating the distinctive characteristics of the groups as well as the similarities and differences between groups. Midwives, social workers and nurses were rated most highly on interpersonal skills and on being a team player whilst doctors were rated most highly on academic ability. Doctors, midwives and social workers were perceived as having the strongest leadership role, whilst doctors were also rated most highly on decision making. All professions were rated highly on confidence and professional competence and, with the exception of social workers, on practical skills. A comparison of profiles for each professional group reveals that, for example, pharmacists and doctors were perceived as having very similar characteristics as were social workers, midwives and nurses. However, the profiles of nurses and doctors were perceived to be very different. The implications of these similarities and differences are discussed in terms of their potential impact on interprofessional interactions, role boundaries and team working

Multiprofessional working, interprofessional learning and primary care: a way forward?

Across all sectors of health and social care there is a growing need for collaboration between professionals, agencies, providers and above all with the people they seek to serve. The significant challenge is how to create, within the existing and future workforce, the capability to work in multi professional teams capable of effective collaboration. The intention of this paper is to explore the implications that multi- or more specifically interprofessional learning may have for collaboration within primary care. As part of this, the state of the current evidence base regarding this form of learning will be explored. However, just as this way of learning is but one element in a wider picture of health care, so the focus will also include the implications for a workforce relevant to future primary care.<br/

Emotional work: students realising, negotiating and overcoming barriers

Purpose – The purpose of the research is to explore Foundation degree students’ experience of an innovative curriculum, designed to enable pathway choices and widen access to Honour's degree programmes in a wide range of health professions and Social Work.Design/methodology/approach – A longitudinal, cohort design followed three years’ of entrants through their degree and in some cases beyond. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were carried out by a dedicated researcher at approximately yearly intervals.Findings – Social networks and friendship groups emerged as pivotal to participants’ well-being and persistence. Institutional barriers included communication problems and a lack of information about timetables and other practical issues. Over time participants came to assert their needs and confront problems, individually and collectively, describing a more questioning and assertive approach to their study and work lives.Research limitations/implications – The experiences over time of students who leave university are needed to explore the role of social group membership and the effect of practical problems. A limitation of the study is that their views are not captured.Practical implications – The importance of naturally-occurring social groups in creating persistence at university has implications for curriculum design and resources (time/space) to support this activity.Social implications – Widening access to HE brings with it new responsibilities to support students over time as transitions occur through programmes of study and during vacation periods.Originality/value – Flexible approaches to education are generally seen to benefit mature students but can be stressful and require good and timely information

Shaping a vision for a 'New Generation' workforce

In this paper Dr Debra Humphris and Dame Jill Macleod Clark, pioneers of the New Generation programme at Southampton University, outline the changes to the education of professionals that they believe are necessary if the healthcare workforce is to be prepared for the future. Their far-reaching recommendations highlight the need for methods of inter-professional education to be fully explored and for the wider healthcare environment to be better equipped to recieve professionals trained in new and innovative ways.<br/

Leadership evaluation: an impact evaluation of a leadership programme

The HCIU and the School of Management undertook an empirical investigation into the impact of Leadership Development for NHS middle-management staff. The cohort was a cross-disciplinary mix of clinical and management personnel from 17 NHS organisations in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. The research focused on evaluating the impact of the development intervention on the individuals and their organisations. The aims were to identify if such an intervention changes the thinking and behaviour of staff and their organisations, without losing sight of evaluating the costs and benefits of a development programme. The framework used for the evaluation was Phillips and Phillips’ modified version of Kirkpatrick’s framework for training evaluation.The results show that the intervention had a substantial impact on the individuals taking part. The participants reported improved self-confidence, more reflective and broader thinking, a heightened sense for other people’s behaviours and actions, and some participants also reported the acquisition of useful management tools to initiate and deal with change and its inherent challenges. However, the research also showed that training and development within the NHS tends to happen haphazardly rather than as an organisation-wide coordinated action. Nearly all research participants (including line-managers of the course participants) confirmed that there are rarely any mechanisms in place to support the application or integration of newly acquired knowledge and skills once back within the working environment. This was amplified by the disintegrated approach of selection and needs analysis on an organisational level before sending individuals on the programme. As the evaluated programme was part of a WDC sponsored pilot project, the cost-benefit analysis did not deliver any significant results. However, it was clear that the lack of appropriate needs analysis contributed to the lack of potential measure to assess the usefulness and benefits of such an intervention. Based on these findings the research report produced a number of recommendations for the strategic, operational, and individual levels within an organisation.<br/

Understanding research: The HCIU Shoes exercise

An exercise for students and tutors to explore the basic questions about research design and method Professor Debra Humphri