Teaching Interprofessional Collaborative Care Skills Using a Blended Learning Approach WGEA April 2016 8/1/2018 [ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

Amber Fitzsimmons, PT, MS, DPTSc Susan Hyde, DDS, MPH, PhD Maria Wamsley, MD Angel Chen, RN, MSN, PNP Cathi Dennehy, PharmD Amber Fitzsimmons, PT, MS, DPTSc Susan Hyde, DDS, MPH, PhD Kirby Lee, PharmD, MAS Josette Rivera, MD Rebecca Shunk, MD UCSF Curriculum Development Working Group Insert CDWG? 8/1/2018 [ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

Background Growing recognition of need to teach collaborative care competencies to all health professional students Multiple barriers to IPE exist Time availability Scheduling challenges Multiple campuses Resources Faculty availability Faculty knowledge and skills

On-line learning Increasing popularity Flexibility for learners and faculty Allows for “blended” format Classroom time: application of knowledge and skills practice May overcome barriers to IPE

Methods Goal: provide early learners with foundational knowledge and skills in interprofessional collaboration Faculty and learners from five health professions convened a working group Developed a set of core competencies expected for all UCSF learners upon graduation Core Principles of Interprofessional Practice Targeted 1st and 2nd year learners Partnered with Coursera to create an on-line course Developed 5 online modules Complementary face-to-face sessions

Methods Learners completed on-line survey after each session Learner focus groups after first-year of curriculum Faculty facilitators completed on-line survey after each session

On-Line Modules 60-90 minutes in length Divided into shorter 10-15 minute segments Features to increase learner engagement Video demos Case examples Expert interviews Patient interviews Integrated quizzes

Face-to-Face Sessions Two-hour sessions, content complementary to on-line modules Learners in small groups of 10-12 Each group led by a faculty facilitator Faculty and learners review on-line module prior to face- to-face session Learners do additional pre-work in advance of the session

Core Principles of Interprofessional Practice Year 1 Module 1 Fall Core Interprofessional Concepts Course Introduction Team-building Activity Module 2 Winter Roles and Responsibilities/ Scope of Practice Interviews of Healthcare Professionals Patient Case Simulation Module 3 Spring Communication Tools and Strategies Skills Practice Briefs Debriefs Huddles Online content F2F content

Core Principles of Interprofessional Practice Year 2 Module 4 Fall Conflict Management and Negotiation Conflict Management Style Application of Conflict Management Skills Module 5 Winter Team Leadership and Membership Leadership Self-assessment Application of Leadership Tools Online content F2F content

Results 600 First-Year Learners and 55 Facilitators

Faculty Facilitator Teaching Experience Percent of Total

Learner Perceptions Introduction to Core IP Concepts 4.07 – 4.24 Module/Session Met objectives* Value of online module (SD)* Value of face-to face session (SD)* Introduction to Core IP Concepts 4.07 – 4.24 3.15 (1.05) 3.12 (1.22) Roles/Responsibilities 4.02 – 4.08 2.99 (1.08) 3.57 (1.15) Communication skills/tools 3.90 – 4.20 2.80 (1.10) 3.30 (1.20) Conflict mgmt/negotiation 3.90 – 4.16 2.90 (1.20) 3.40 (1.20) Leadership/membership 4.00 – 4.10 3.20 (1.20) Survey response rate 28-50% *1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent 8/1/2018 [ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

Faculty Perceptions Module/Session Value On-line Module Mean (SD)* Face-to-Face Mean (SD)* Introduction to Core IP Concepts 4.31 (.85) 4.31 (.70) Roles/Responsibilities 3.91 (.71) 4.38 (.55) Communication skills/tools 3.75 (.80) 4.18 (.86) Conflict mgmt/negotiation 4.46 (.52) 4.13 (.74) Leadership/membership 4.00 (.82) 3.79 (.79) N=18,38,28,21 *1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent 8/1/2018 [ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

Focus Group Results 2 focus groups Focus group 1 (n = 5; nursing) Focus group 2 (n = 11; interprofessional) Overall Curriculum felt like an “add-on” On-line content Appreciated flexibility Wanted increased interactivity e.g. more examples, patient cases, videos Too lengthy

Focus Group Results Face-to-Face Sessions More time to interact with other learners in their small groups and less structured activity Large variation in clinical knowledge/skills/experience between professions Challenge of integrating 5 healthcare professions Quality of sessions were dependent upon facilitator skills

Conclusions…. Learners value flexibility afforded by on-line modules Learners value interaction with students from other healthcare professions Faculty tended to rate both online modules and face-to-face sessions more highly than the students Build more time for informal interaction into face-to-face sessions Need to increase integration of IPE content into core curriculum and create additional opportunities for engagement with other healthcare professionals Faculty development is essential

Faculty Perceptions Item Session 1 Mean (SD)* n = 18 Session 2 n = 35 Session 3 n = 28 Online module provided important background content for students 4.54 (.52) 4.37 (.49) 4.11 (.50) Online module provided important background content for me as a facilitator 4.46 (.52) 3.8 (.90) 3.89 (.69) Felt prepared to facilitate based on on-line module 4.31 (.75) 4.03 (.71) 3.79 (.83) Felt prepared to facilitate based on faculty development session 4.36 (.63) 4.44 (.65) 4.14 (.76) Add the n of participants *1=strongly disagree 2= disagree 3=neutral 4=agree 5=strongly agree 8/1/2018 [ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]