Interprofessional geriatric education in a post-pandemic world: comparing outcomes of in-person versus virtual simulations.

IF 0.8 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Diane Brown, Cynthia Hovland, Susan Hazelett, Barbara E Milliken, Mary Gergis, Jennifer K Davis, Jennifer Drost, Susan M Fosnight, Denise Kropp, Michelle Gareri, Brandi Chrzanowski, Darcia L Simpson, Jessica S Wilson, Carol A Kridler, Kristin R Baughman, Margaret Sanders
{"title":"Interprofessional geriatric education in a post-pandemic world: comparing outcomes of in-person versus virtual simulations.","authors":"Diane Brown, Cynthia Hovland, Susan Hazelett, Barbara E Milliken, Mary Gergis, Jennifer K Davis, Jennifer Drost, Susan M Fosnight, Denise Kropp, Michelle Gareri, Brandi Chrzanowski, Darcia L Simpson, Jessica S Wilson, Carol A Kridler, Kristin R Baughman, Margaret Sanders","doi":"10.1080/02701960.2025.2505648","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interprofessional education (IPE) enhanced with simulation for pre-licensure health care students can be used to teach a collaborative interprofessional team approach to promote positive health outcomes in the older adult population. Little is known about outcome differences between in-person and virtual IPE. A multi-step, simulation-enhanced IPE was developed based on Wagner's Chronic Care and Constructivism Active Learning theoretical frameworks and implemented in-person and virtually for cohort comparison. Learning outcomes were the advancement of interprofessional collaborative competencies. Two cohorts of students from nursing, pharmacy, counseling, social work, and speech therapy, participated in consecutive Fall semesters (<i>n</i> = 74 in-person, <i>n =</i> 74 virtual). Pre- and post-IPE measures of teamwork using the Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale (ISVS) total and individual items showed within-group advancement of competencies (<i>p</i> = 0.0054 in-person, <i>p</i> = 0.0024 virtual). Comparison between groups of pre/post mean change scores on five ISVS items showed no statistically significant difference. Satisfaction ratings using a researcher-created survey of items on a 5-point Likert scale demonstrated significantly higher scores for in-person education on 7 out of 10 individual items and the overall satisfaction rating, (<i>p</i> < 0.5). Virtual learning has become more commonplace following the pandemic, and these results suggest there are benefits for both methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":46431,"journal":{"name":"GERONTOLOGY & GERIATRICS EDUCATION","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GERONTOLOGY & GERIATRICS EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02701960.2025.2505648","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interprofessional education (IPE) enhanced with simulation for pre-licensure health care students can be used to teach a collaborative interprofessional team approach to promote positive health outcomes in the older adult population. Little is known about outcome differences between in-person and virtual IPE. A multi-step, simulation-enhanced IPE was developed based on Wagner's Chronic Care and Constructivism Active Learning theoretical frameworks and implemented in-person and virtually for cohort comparison. Learning outcomes were the advancement of interprofessional collaborative competencies. Two cohorts of students from nursing, pharmacy, counseling, social work, and speech therapy, participated in consecutive Fall semesters (n = 74 in-person, n = 74 virtual). Pre- and post-IPE measures of teamwork using the Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale (ISVS) total and individual items showed within-group advancement of competencies (p = 0.0054 in-person, p = 0.0024 virtual). Comparison between groups of pre/post mean change scores on five ISVS items showed no statistically significant difference. Satisfaction ratings using a researcher-created survey of items on a 5-point Likert scale demonstrated significantly higher scores for in-person education on 7 out of 10 individual items and the overall satisfaction rating, (p < 0.5). Virtual learning has become more commonplace following the pandemic, and these results suggest there are benefits for both methods.

大流行后世界的跨专业老年教育:面对面与虚拟模拟结果的比较
跨专业教育(IPE)通过模拟对获得执照前的医疗保健学生进行增强,可用于教授协作的跨专业团队方法,以促进老年人的积极健康结果。人们对面对面的IPE和虚拟IPE之间的结果差异知之甚少。基于瓦格纳的慢性护理和建构主义主动学习理论框架,我们开发了一个多步骤、模拟增强的IPE,并在现场和虚拟环境中实施,用于队列比较。学习成果是跨专业协作能力的提升。两组来自护理、药学、咨询、社会工作和语言治疗的学生连续参加了秋季学期的研究(n = 74人面对面,n = 74人虚拟)。使用跨专业社会化和价值量表(ISVS)对团队合作进行ipe前和ipe后的测量,总项目和个人项目显示出团队内部能力的进步(p = 0.0054, p = 0.0024虚拟)。ISVS 5项的前后平均变化得分组间比较,差异无统计学意义。使用研究者创建的5点李克特量表项目调查的满意度评级显示,面对面教育在10个单独项目和总体满意度评级中的7个得分显着更高
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
GERONTOLOGY & GERIATRICS EDUCATION
GERONTOLOGY & GERIATRICS EDUCATION EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
18.80%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: Gerontology & Geriatrics Education is geared toward the exchange of information related to research, curriculum development, course and program evaluation, classroom and practice innovation, and other topics with educational implications for gerontology and geriatrics. It is designed to appeal to a broad range of students, teachers, practitioners, administrators, and policy makers and is dedicated to improving awareness of best practices and resources for gerontologists and gerontology/geriatrics educators. Peer Review Policy: All research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by two anonymous referees.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信