Facilitator Perceptions of Debriefing Virtual and Live Interprofessional Curriculum.

Shelby Edwards, Renee Cadzow, Tracy Bentley-Root, Heather Ferro
{"title":"Facilitator Perceptions of Debriefing Virtual and Live Interprofessional Curriculum.","authors":"Shelby Edwards, Renee Cadzow, Tracy Bentley-Root, Heather Ferro","doi":"10.21091/jah.2026.02027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With COVID-19, many professional programs required to offer interprofessional education (IPE) had to pivot to online delivery modalities. Post-pandemic, some returned to in-person sessions while others continued online. This qualitative study explored facilitator perceptions of the strengths and differences in debriefing IPE simulation sessions conducted both live and online during the same semester. Sessions entailed viewing and discussing pre-recorded video clips; facilitators were interviewed about their perceptions and observations. This is a follow up to a previously published report which found students did not perceive any significant differences between online and in-person IPE sessions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Facilitators were interviewed about their impressions of both IPE session types. Twelve facilitators from six professional programs participating in IPE engaged in one of three 90-minute interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thematic analysis was conducted using a consensus-building, inductive approach. Analysis revealed numerous themes, including what constituted high and low student engagement, perceptions facilitating both types of sessions, and observations for conducting IPE in future semesters.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Based on these results, facilitator-informed recommendations for running IPE curricula to better meet the needs of student learners emerged. \"Lessons learned\" to promote engagement and foster learning outcomes with both virtual and in-person IPE are presented for future consideration.</p>","PeriodicalId":35979,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Allied Health","volume":"55 2","pages":"233-240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Allied Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21091/jah.2026.02027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: With COVID-19, many professional programs required to offer interprofessional education (IPE) had to pivot to online delivery modalities. Post-pandemic, some returned to in-person sessions while others continued online. This qualitative study explored facilitator perceptions of the strengths and differences in debriefing IPE simulation sessions conducted both live and online during the same semester. Sessions entailed viewing and discussing pre-recorded video clips; facilitators were interviewed about their perceptions and observations. This is a follow up to a previously published report which found students did not perceive any significant differences between online and in-person IPE sessions.

Methods: Facilitators were interviewed about their impressions of both IPE session types. Twelve facilitators from six professional programs participating in IPE engaged in one of three 90-minute interviews.

Results: Thematic analysis was conducted using a consensus-building, inductive approach. Analysis revealed numerous themes, including what constituted high and low student engagement, perceptions facilitating both types of sessions, and observations for conducting IPE in future semesters.

Discussion: Based on these results, facilitator-informed recommendations for running IPE curricula to better meet the needs of student learners emerged. "Lessons learned" to promote engagement and foster learning outcomes with both virtual and in-person IPE are presented for future consideration.

主持人对汇报的看法,虚拟和实时跨专业课程。
目的:面对COVID-19,许多需要提供跨专业教育(IPE)的专业项目不得不转向在线交付模式。大流行后,一些人回到了面对面的会议,而另一些人继续上网。本定性研究探讨了在同一学期进行的现场和在线的国际政治经济学报告模拟会议中,主持人对优势和差异的看法。会议包括观看和讨论预先录制的录像片段;对辅导员进行了关于他们的看法和观察的采访。这是之前发表的一份报告的后续报告,该报告发现学生们认为在线和面对面的IPE课程之间没有任何显著差异。方法:对主持人进行访谈,了解他们对两种IPE会话类型的印象。来自6个专业项目的12位主持人参与了三次90分钟的访谈。结果:采用建立共识、归纳的方法进行专题分析。分析揭示了许多主题,包括什么构成了高和低的学生参与,促进这两种类型的会议的看法,以及在未来学期进行IPE的观察。讨论:基于这些结果,提出了关于如何更好地满足学生学习者需求的国际政治经济学课程的建议。“经验教训”,以促进参与和促进学习成果与虚拟和面对面的IPE提出供未来考虑。
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
Journal of Allied Health
Journal of Allied Health Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of Allied Health is the official publication of the Association of Schools of Allied Health Professions (ASAHP) . The Journal is the only interdisciplinary allied health periodical, publishing scholarly works related to research and development, feature articles, research abstracts and book reviews. Readers of The Journal comprise allied health leaders, educators, faculty and students. Subscribers to The Journal consist of domestic and international college and university libraries, health organizations and hospitals. Almost 20% of subscribers, in the last three years, have been from outside of the United States. Subscribers include the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association and major universities.
×
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
小红书