This presentation will highlight the development and significant evaluative contributions of the evaluation of a 2-year longitudinal university wide interprofessional education experience atThomasJeffersonUniversitysince 2007. The program studied brings together teams of students from medicine, nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, public health or pharmacy, who visits an individual with one or more chronic health conditions. Students work collaboratively to conduct life and health histories, review healthcare issues, and discuss expectations of patients related to healthcare providers. Evaluation began with the inception of this IPE program including student and faculty surveys, focus groups, reflection papers and course evaluations.

Program evaluation is an iterative process. Surveys were administered to students at the beginning and end of their terms. While results reflected student attitudes were ‘high’, focus groups and course evaluations help dig deeper and led to several program changes including shortening some of the assignments and changing the logistics of the team meetings.

Attitude surveys can provide information on a broad scale. However, by themselves, their value is limited. While, qualitative approaches also have limitations, they may provide more valuable in-depth information to identify strengths and weaknesses of a program. As a result, this project is now leaning more heavily on these approaches to gain valuable information from both students and faculty.

Learning Objectives: Upon completion of this learning activity, participants should be able to:

1. Relate the evaluative contributions of the 2-year longitudinal university wide interprofessional education experience atThomasJeffersonUniversityto their own intuition.

2. Assess the various types of program evaluation methods discussed and apply them to their own needs.

Students completed the ATHTC at matriculation and at program completion in Spring 2011. A paired samples t-test showed significant improvements in attitude mean scores between baseline and program completion in all disciplines with sufficient sample size. A paired samples t-test for students in all programs (n=173) found significant improvements (p=.000) in attitudes (baseline mean 3.27 (.45) and 3.75 (.58), while an ANOVA showed no significant differences between groups.

Improved attitudes toward team-based care may be one important indicator of program success. A limitation of this study is lack of a control group of students not exposed to formal IPE. Next steps include measuring attitudes longitudinally during the remainder of training and into clinical practice.

Learning Objectives: Upon completion of this learning activity, participants should be able to:

1. Recognize that student attitudes toward IPE, a potential indicator of behavior, are often used as one measure of success.

2. Assess the attitudinal tool discussed and apply them to their own needs to measure attitudes toward team-based care.

Methods: Fifteen infants 4 to 6-7 months of age participated; 5 BPI, 5 post-stroke, and 5 controls. We recorded 3 bilateral, isometric, biceps contractions in 90 degrees elbow flexion and neutral forearm rotation, while each infant grasped a dowel. The 5 mean measures of MU activity computed were: spike amplitude (SA), spike frequency (MSF), spike duration (MSD), spike slope (MSS), and number of peaks per spike (MNPPS). Baseline and peak muscle contraction, elicited by tendon tap, were obtained from sEMG. A mixed model ANOVA with repeated measures was used to analyze differences in spike shape data by group, age and limb.

Results: All 5 variables increased from 4 to 6-7 months in infants with BPI and controls. For infants post-stroke, 3 variables decreased in the arm at-risk across age, while MSF increased.

Conclusions: Shape spike analysis of sEMG seems to be a sensitive method to assess MU activation in infants at risk. Infants with BPI and controls recruited higher threshold MU’s during contractions, whereas, infants post-stroke increased the frequency of MU firing perhaps to generate sufficient force due to decreased MU recruitment.

Learning Objectives: At the end of this presentation, participants will:

1. Compare the timeline for presentation of upper limb asymmetry common to infants who sustain perinatal brachial plexus injury vs. those who sustain perinatal stroke.

2. Discuss a unique method to analyze differences in motor unit activation based on isometric surface EMG.

3. Identify the key differences in motor unit activation between infants with a peripheral brachial plexus injury and perinatal stroke and how the results can influence clinical practice.

Objective: Determine the effectiveness of the current SIDS education at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (TJUH) Newborn Nursery, and assess knowledge of SIDS risk factors and perceptions of safe sleep recommendations among new mothers.

Design/Methods: Cross-sectional, telephone survey of new mothers following hospital discharge from the Newborn Nursery at TJUH between April and October 2011. Surveys were conducted at 2-4 weeks postpartum. Surveys included choice of infant sleep position, knowledge of SIDS risk factors, and perceptions of safe sleep recommendations.

Results: To date, 193 mothers have completed the survey. Participants were young (mean age + SD: 27 + 6 yrs), and largely low-income (57% with Medicaid; 66% with WIC) and African American (58%); 70% completed high school, 46% were single, and 42% were primiparous. Six percent reported using the side or front sleep position for their newborns; 8% stated that a non-back position was the safest position; and 16% reported cobedding with their newborn. Only 67% recalled a doctor telling them what sleep position to use. Though the majority (61%) of mothers reported the postpartum period as the first time a health professional (HP) spoke to them about safe sleep, 35% reported that a HP spoke to them during their pregnancy. As many as 23% of mothers felt that infants were more likely to choke while sleeping on their backs. Single mothers were less likely than married mothers to know that the safest sleep position is the back position (84% vs. 93%, p=0.04), and more likely to think that the back sleep position is associated with an increased risk for choking (32% vs. 15%, p=0.02). Mothers receiving WIC benefits when compared to those without WIC were more likely to perceive an increased risk of choking with the back sleep position (29% vs 11%, p=0.01). There was no significant difference in choice of sleep position based on WIC status, shared sleep surface, education level, age or race/ethnicity.

Conclusions: HPs need to emphasize the back sleep position as the safest sleep position, address related concerns about choking, and educate families about the risks of cobedding.

Learning Objectives: At the end of the session, the participant will;

1. Identify the common sleep positions mothers reported they use to put their infants to sleep.

2. Discuss strategies for addressing parental concerns about choking while promoting the back sleep position as the safest.

JeffersonCenterfor InterProfessional Education has successfully been providing IPE to healthcare students for over 5 years. A long term strategic goal was identified to “create innovative learning environments that support interprofessional education including state-of-the-art technologies”. In actualizing this goal, the curriculum was enhanced with an online discussion forum to assist in student group processing and reflection.

A pretest-posttest design was used to answer: (a) Does computer supported interprofessional education affects the attitudes toward healthcare teamwork? And (b) To what extent are perceptions of team performance affected by a computer supported interprofessional education component on enhancing group processing and teamwork? Student attitudes and perceptions were measured before and after participating in CSIE.

Results from the Team Performance Scale showed a significant increase in student’s perceptions pre to post CSIE signifying students perceived their team to be functioning better after participating in CSIE. Results of the Attitudes Toward Healthcare Teams survey did not show a statistical significance increase, however the data showed an upward trend in attitude scores.

The findings support the importance of utilizing reflection for team processing and further endorses the need for integration of computer supported interprofessional education within healthcare curriculums. Curriculum planners can utilize these results to integrate effective interprofessional strategies that incorporate CSIE to positively impact student attitudes of teamwork.

Learning Objectives: At the end of this session, participants will:

1. Discuss one way to enhance IPE communication using technology.

2. Identify one computer supported strategy to encourage reflection after an IPE experience.

Background: The international literature clearly identifies the needs for greater integration of interprofessional education into the curricula of entry-level health professions to enhance mutual respect, effective team-work and patient-centred care. This paper will report on the design and outcomes of an interprofessional learning program developed at a rural university in Australia.

Description of Program: The learning program was developed by a te of academic and clinical health professionals around the care of two clients with chronic conditions. An evaluation methodology explored the students’ attitudes and experiences of participating in this program. Data consisting of pre and post program surveys, audience response data and qualitative comments. This was analyzed to determine the effectiveness of the program in promoting interprofessional learning.

Results: A majority of participants had pre-conceived ideas about the value of interprofessional learning to their professional practice; however following participation they were overwhelmingly positive about the value of this type of learning to their future practice. They felt the program gave them a greater appreciation of their role within the interprofessional team and provided valuable insights into the scope of practice of their clinical colleagues.

Conclusion: The student participants found this program valuable, stimulating and challenging, with most indicating that they would welcome more opportunities to learn within interprofessional groups. The outcomes may be useful for academic and clinical educators and will inform the expansion of interprofessional learning activities at a rural university inNew South Wales,Australia.

Relevance to interprofessional education: The design of this education program can be replicated and/or adapted to focus on any number of clinical scenarios to engage students in learning together to enhance their teamwork and communication skills.

Learning Objectives: Following the presentation of this paper the audience will be able to:

1. Identify the strategies used to incorporate interprofessional competencies in a short educational program delivered to pre-graduate nursing, medical, pharmacy and social work students based at a rural university inAustralia.

2. Explain the use of simulation technology within the interprofessional education (IPE) and/or practice program delivered to a range of health students based at a rural university inAustralia.

This research project aimed to identify positive and negative factors contributing to the Mentors' experiences participating and to understand how involvement in the program has impacted their daily lives. Focus groups were conducted with Health Mentors (N= 30), which were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes.

Many Health Mentors described the positive impact of sharing their experiences with interprofessional student teams, which provided the sense of giving back to the community and improving health services for others. Some Health Mentors also describe their experience to be empowering as they narrated their stories of perseverance in the face of many challenges. Along with these positive experiences, Mentors also describe the fine balance required around issues of disclosure, vulnerability and managing anger at the health care system. The results of this study highlight the importance of volunteer preparation for the role ofMentor. These results can inform other programs that draw on community volunteers in the role of educator.

Learning Objectives: At the end of this session, participants will:

1. Identify two potential opportunities related to volunteer involvement in interprofessional student training programs.

2. Identify two potential risks related to volunteer involvement in interprofessional student training programs.

3. Discuss three key principles that can guide the planning and implementation of similar community-university initiatives to ensure the safety of community patient educator volunteers.

Background: Northeastern/North CentralPennsylvania is home to several excellent healthcare education programs. Unfortunately these programs are somewhat smaller and isolated with most universities/colleges housing just a few disciplines. Interprofessional education requires collaboration across institutions, professions, and county lines. The Northeast/central Interprofessional Education Coalition, comprised of a group of educators from 12 colleges and universities, was created in 2008 with a mission to promote IPE in our region.

Description of Intervention: An Interprofessional Care Summit was held on March 30, 2011 at five different sites inScranton,Wilkes-Barre andWilliamsport. The collaborative team designed a case which would allow interaction between the students from the sixteen different professions represented. The theme of the summit was the medically underserved. Each summit began with an opening session that included a description of interprofessional education and an overview of the summit. A brief video case-vignette was viewed by the participants. After the case presentation, participants broke into small interprofessional groups of 10 students and 2 facilitators. Students discussed the case and learned from, about and with each other. The small group discussion continued for approximately one hour at which time they reconvened for a wrap up discussion.

Results: Over 500 students and 80 facilitators participated in the summit. A survey Monkey evaluation was sent to each student and facilitator. 200 students and 67 facilitators completed the survey. 90% of the facilitators and 80% of the students agreed that the case-discussion approach was an effective way to teach IPE. 91% of the facilitators and 78% of the students agreed that the summit was effective. Comments were overwhelmingly positive.

Conclusions: It is possible to develop a strong interprofessional education program when faculty members work collaboratively across not only disciplines but also across a geographical region.

Learning Objectives:

1. To expand student’s knowledge of other health professions and promote interprofessional understanding of other health professionals’ roles and responsibilities in patient care.
2. To identify and discuss gaps and mismatches in understanding of one’s own health discipline and other disciplines in the context of patient care.
3. To promote personal reflection about the identification of healthcare professional roles and responsibilities.