Outcomes from a single-intervention trial to improve interprofessional practice behaviors at a student-led free clinic

Background Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is the practice of two or more healthcare professionals working together and learning from one another to improve health outcomes. IPC is important for quality training, typically improving individual and group level outcomes. Students value the opportunity for leadership and teamwork development when IPC is offered in their curriculum. The Indiana University Student Outreach Clinic (IUSOC) is a student run clinic that provides free primary care services to underserved residents residing in Indianapolis, Indiana. The IUSOC partner leaders identified a need to enhance knowledge about partner roles, scope of practice, and professional training with the hopes of improving quality of care through IPC and utilization of clinic resources. Methods A cluster randomized design consisted of education session days and control days. Participants had an equal selection probability. Student partners from ten different disciplines were involved. Two survey instruments were used for data collection: 1) The Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale and 2) The Professional Consciousness Raising Questionnaire. The former measured the attitudes and beliefs that underlie interprofessional socialization, while the latter assessed pre/post student knowledge of the roles and responsibilities of each partner. Results The control arm of the study was composed of 167 student participants and the intervention arm had 170 participants. Participants in the intervention arm had greater scores for “ability to work with others”, “value in working with others”, and “comfort in working with others.” The intervention arm also had significantly increased odds of correctly identifying the roles responsibilities of the nursing, law, dental, and global health disciplines. Conclusions Results of this study demonstrate that administering a short interprofessional education exercise to healthcare professional students leads to improved IPC through increased interprofessional knowledge about other professions and change in beliefs and values toward the value of interprofessional collaboration among healthcare professionals

Reference distributions of aortic calcification and association with Framingham risk score

Abstract Evidence supporting aortic calcification as a leverageable cardiovascular risk factor is rapidly growing. Given aortic calcification’s potential as a clinical correlate, we assessed granular vertebral-indexed calcification measurements of the abdominal aorta in a well curated reference population. We evaluated the relationship of aortic calcification measurements with Framingham risk scores. After exclusion, 4073 participants from the Reference Analytic Morphomic Population with varying vertebral levels were included. The percent of the aortic wall calcified was used to assess calcification burden at the L1–L4 levels. Descriptive statistics of participants, sex-specific vertebral indexed calcification measurements, relational plots, and relevant associations are reported. Mean aortic attenuation was higher in female than male participants. Overall, mean aortic calcium was higher with reference to inferior abdominal aortic measurements and demonstrated significant differences across all abdominal levels [L3 Area (mm $$^2$$ 2 ): Females 6.34 (sd 16.60), Males 6.23 (sd 17.21); L3 Volume (mm $$^3$$ 3 ): Females 178.90 (sd 474.19), Males 195.80 (sd 547.36); Wall Calcification (%): Females (L4) 6.97 (sd 16.03), Males (L3) 5.46 (13.80)]. Participants with elevated calcification had significantly higher Framingham risk scores compared to participants with normal calcification scores. Opportunistically measuring aortic calcification may inform further cardiovascular risk assessment and enhance cardiovascular event surveillance efforts