Nurse practitioner faculty attitudes about interprofessional education.

IF 1.2 4区 医学
Kimberly Posey, Lori Prol
{"title":"Nurse practitioner faculty attitudes about interprofessional education.","authors":"Kimberly Posey, Lori Prol","doi":"10.1097/JXX.0000000000000983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nurse practitioner (NP) faculty attitudes toward interprofessional education (IPE) can be barriers to the shift in culture and successful implementation of IPE into nursing curricula. A paucity of studies exist comparing faculty attitudes of IPE with different educational modalities.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this research is to compare NP faculty attitudes toward IPE between IPE experiences and educational modalities in NP academic programs.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>A quantitative cross-sectional comparative design was used. An electronic survey was advertised to approximately 3,000 members of the National Organization of NP Faculties by email blasts to assess their attitudes toward IPE in the academic setting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participating NP faculty ( n = 208) completed the survey, with a response rate of 6.9%. The results showed that NP faculty reported positive attitudes toward IPE ( M = 4.33). Nurse practitioner faculty attitudes toward IPE and participation in IPE experiences were not statistically significant ( p = .126). Nurse practitioner faculty attitudes toward IPE did not differ with the educational modality. The main effect of the NP degree program educational modality was not statistically significant, F (2, 172) = 0.74, p = .479.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nurse practitioner faculty are optimistic about IPE in multiple educational modalities but still have some reservations about how to implement IPE activities successfully.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>The NP faculty attitudes and barriers to IPE curricular development in all educational modalities must be addressed to prepare NP students to be competent collaborative practice-ready providers on graduation.</p>","PeriodicalId":17179,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JXX.0000000000000983","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Nurse practitioner (NP) faculty attitudes toward interprofessional education (IPE) can be barriers to the shift in culture and successful implementation of IPE into nursing curricula. A paucity of studies exist comparing faculty attitudes of IPE with different educational modalities.

Purpose: The purpose of this research is to compare NP faculty attitudes toward IPE between IPE experiences and educational modalities in NP academic programs.

Methodology: A quantitative cross-sectional comparative design was used. An electronic survey was advertised to approximately 3,000 members of the National Organization of NP Faculties by email blasts to assess their attitudes toward IPE in the academic setting.

Results: Participating NP faculty ( n = 208) completed the survey, with a response rate of 6.9%. The results showed that NP faculty reported positive attitudes toward IPE ( M = 4.33). Nurse practitioner faculty attitudes toward IPE and participation in IPE experiences were not statistically significant ( p = .126). Nurse practitioner faculty attitudes toward IPE did not differ with the educational modality. The main effect of the NP degree program educational modality was not statistically significant, F (2, 172) = 0.74, p = .479.

Conclusions: Nurse practitioner faculty are optimistic about IPE in multiple educational modalities but still have some reservations about how to implement IPE activities successfully.

Implications: The NP faculty attitudes and barriers to IPE curricular development in all educational modalities must be addressed to prepare NP students to be competent collaborative practice-ready providers on graduation.

执业护士教师对跨专业教育的态度。
背景:执业护士(NP)教师对跨专业教育(IPE)的态度可能会阻碍文化的转变以及在护理课程中成功实施 IPE。将教师对 IPE 的态度与不同教育模式进行比较的研究很少。研究目的:本研究旨在比较 NP 教师对 IPE 的态度,以及 IPE 经验和 NP 学术项目中的教育模式:采用定量横断面比较设计。通过电子邮件向全国 NP 学院组织的约 3000 名成员发布电子调查广告,以评估他们对学术环境中 IPE 的态度:参与调查的 NP 教师(n = 208)完成了调查,回复率为 6.9%。结果显示,护理专业教师对 IPE 持积极态度(M = 4.33)。护师对 IPE 和参与 IPE 体验的态度没有统计学意义 (p = .126)。执业护师对 IPE 的态度与教育模式没有差异。护士学位课程教育模式的主效应无统计学意义,F(2, 172) = 0.74, p = .479.结论:结论:执业护师教师对多种教育模式下的 IPE 持乐观态度,但对如何成功实施 IPE 活动仍有一些保留意见:必须解决护士执业者教师对所有教育模式中 IPE 课程发展的态度和障碍,以培养护士执业者学生在毕业时成为胜任的合作实践准备提供者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
16.70%
发文量
172
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (JAANP) is a monthly peer-reviewed professional journal that serves as the official publication of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners. Published since 1989, the JAANP provides a strong clinical focus with articles related to primary, secondary, and tertiary care, nurse practitioner education, health policy, ethics and ethical issues, and health care delivery. The journal publishes original research, integrative/comprehensive reviews, case studies, a variety of topics in clinical practice, and theory-based articles related to patient and professional education. Although the majority of nurse practitioners function in primary care, there is an increasing focus on the provision of care across all types of systems from acute to long-term care settings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信