Abstract
Background: Interprofessional education initiatives can be used as effective means to influence students' perceptions of their own and others' roles and interactions as health professionals. There is a need to better understand how interprofessional education learning outcomes are appreciated by students.
Aim: The aims of this study were to describe and compare evaluation feedback from students in undergraduate nursing and medicine programmes about the learning outcomes of an interprofessional education initiative.
Methods: A mixed methods pre-post-study design was used to collect data using evaluation questions about the initiative and two interprofessional learning outcomes: communication and teamwork. Ratings were analysed with a two-way repeated measures analysis of variance or a t-test. Written responses were analysed using a general inductive approach.
Results: Data from 30 nursing students and 12 medical students were analysed. A noteworthy finding was a significantly higher average rating for nursing students than medicine students before and after the session for the statement about valuing interprofessional learning. Three themes represented comments from both groups: positive experiences, relevance to practice, and learning design issues.
Discussion: Findings were interpreted to indicate that students from both programmes valued the learning outcomes session and was greater at the end of the session. Notably, the perceived value of interprofessional learning was higher for nursing students than medical students before and after the session. This finding may be related to the familiarity nursing students may have with the teaching methods used in the initiative. Further exploration of this finding is needed so educators can better understand how they can provide optimal learning experiences for all students who participate in interprofessional education.
Conclusion: Nursing and medicine students appear to value the interprofessional learning outcomes in an undergraduate health professional initiative. However, differences between these two groups of students are an area for further exploration.