在混合职业模拟场景中通过跨职业身份触发促进发言:两组双盲预测试设计。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare Pub Date : 2025-09-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JMDH.S512952
Ruud Kuipers, Laurens Reinke, Jaap Tulleken, Jan-Jaap Reinders
{"title":"在混合职业模拟场景中通过跨职业身份触发促进发言:两组双盲预测试设计。","authors":"Ruud Kuipers, Laurens Reinke, Jaap Tulleken, Jan-Jaap Reinders","doi":"10.2147/JMDH.S512952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Speaking up can manifest in various forms, such as raising concerns or sharing ideas. While conceptual overlap exists within its behavioural dimensions, distinctions remain, including context-dependent social risks. Regarding the assurance of quality and safety in patient care, speaking up is paramount, particularly in mixed-profession groups. Speaking up requires specific competencies and depends on individuals' motivation to do so. Interprofessional identity (IPI) is a specific source of intrinsic motivation for interprofessional collaboration (IPC). Little is known about its relationship with speaking up. This study aims to investigate whether conversational topics act as triggers of IPI affecting speaking-up behaviour, and whether the strength of their influence varies across different conversational topics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants of this study were 41 dental bachelor and 43 dental hygiene students. IPI was measured using the Extended Professional Identity Scale (EPIS) eight weeks prior to a simulation session (not a training). Students were assigned into weak or strong identity conditions based on EPIS scores. Small mixed-profession groups with four to five members were formed based on their identity condition and in alphabetic order. Every mixed-profession group discussed eight conversational topics. Groups listed up to ten ideas per topic. The number of ideas generated per topic in each group was used to measure speaking up. A higher idea percentage in the strong IPI group indicated activated IPI, reflecting identity-congruent behaviour.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mixed-profession groups with relatively strong IPI showed more speaking up than groups with weak identifiers. Conversational topics can trigger IPI to varying degrees, reflected in differing levels of speaking up.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Some topics raise awareness of IPI, boosting speaking up in groups with relatively strong IPI. Using Extended Professional Identity Theory (EPIT) and effective IPI triggers in simulations helps trigger this behaviour. Moreover, reflective debriefing is likely to further support IPI and encourage speaking up.</p>","PeriodicalId":16357,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","volume":"18 ","pages":"5521-5533"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12417682/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Promoting Speaking Up Through Interprofessional Identity Triggers in a Mixed-Profession Simulation Scenario: Two Group Double-Blinded Pre-Test-Only Design.\",\"authors\":\"Ruud Kuipers, Laurens Reinke, Jaap Tulleken, Jan-Jaap Reinders\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JMDH.S512952\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Speaking up can manifest in various forms, such as raising concerns or sharing ideas. While conceptual overlap exists within its behavioural dimensions, distinctions remain, including context-dependent social risks. Regarding the assurance of quality and safety in patient care, speaking up is paramount, particularly in mixed-profession groups. Speaking up requires specific competencies and depends on individuals' motivation to do so. Interprofessional identity (IPI) is a specific source of intrinsic motivation for interprofessional collaboration (IPC). Little is known about its relationship with speaking up. This study aims to investigate whether conversational topics act as triggers of IPI affecting speaking-up behaviour, and whether the strength of their influence varies across different conversational topics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants of this study were 41 dental bachelor and 43 dental hygiene students. IPI was measured using the Extended Professional Identity Scale (EPIS) eight weeks prior to a simulation session (not a training). Students were assigned into weak or strong identity conditions based on EPIS scores. Small mixed-profession groups with four to five members were formed based on their identity condition and in alphabetic order. Every mixed-profession group discussed eight conversational topics. Groups listed up to ten ideas per topic. The number of ideas generated per topic in each group was used to measure speaking up. A higher idea percentage in the strong IPI group indicated activated IPI, reflecting identity-congruent behaviour.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mixed-profession groups with relatively strong IPI showed more speaking up than groups with weak identifiers. Conversational topics can trigger IPI to varying degrees, reflected in differing levels of speaking up.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Some topics raise awareness of IPI, boosting speaking up in groups with relatively strong IPI. Using Extended Professional Identity Theory (EPIT) and effective IPI triggers in simulations helps trigger this behaviour. Moreover, reflective debriefing is likely to further support IPI and encourage speaking up.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"5521-5533\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12417682/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S512952\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S512952","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:畅所欲言可以有多种形式,比如提出担忧或分享想法。虽然在行为方面存在概念重叠,但仍然存在差异,包括依赖于环境的社会风险。在保证病人护理的质量和安全方面,直言不讳是至关重要的,特别是在混合职业群体中。畅所欲言需要特定的能力,也取决于个人这样做的动机。跨专业认同(IPI)是跨专业合作(IPC)的内在动机的特定来源。人们对它与直言不讳的关系知之甚少。本研究旨在探讨会话话题是否作为IPI影响说话行为的触发因素,以及它们的影响强度是否在不同的会话话题中有所不同。方法:本研究的对象为41名口腔本科学生和43名口腔卫生学专业学生。IPI使用扩展职业认同量表(EPIS)在模拟会议(不是培训)前八周进行测量。根据EPIS分数,学生被分配到弱或强身份条件。根据身份条件和字母顺序组成了四至五名成员的小型混合职业小组。每个混合职业小组讨论8个话题。每个小组最多列出10个主题的想法。每个小组中每个话题产生的想法数量被用来衡量发言。在IPI强的组中,较高的想法百分比表明IPI激活,反映了身份一致的行为。结果:IPI相对较强的混合职业群体比标识符较弱的群体更有发言权。对话话题可以在不同程度上触发IPI,这反映在说话的不同程度上。结论:一些话题提高了人们对IPI的认识,促进了IPI相对较强的群体的发言。在模拟中使用扩展职业认同理论(EPIT)和有效的IPI触发器有助于触发这种行为。此外,反思性汇报可能会进一步支持IPI,并鼓励畅所欲言。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Promoting Speaking Up Through Interprofessional Identity Triggers in a Mixed-Profession Simulation Scenario: Two Group Double-Blinded Pre-Test-Only Design.

Promoting Speaking Up Through Interprofessional Identity Triggers in a Mixed-Profession Simulation Scenario: Two Group Double-Blinded Pre-Test-Only Design.

Promoting Speaking Up Through Interprofessional Identity Triggers in a Mixed-Profession Simulation Scenario: Two Group Double-Blinded Pre-Test-Only Design.

Promoting Speaking Up Through Interprofessional Identity Triggers in a Mixed-Profession Simulation Scenario: Two Group Double-Blinded Pre-Test-Only Design.

Background: Speaking up can manifest in various forms, such as raising concerns or sharing ideas. While conceptual overlap exists within its behavioural dimensions, distinctions remain, including context-dependent social risks. Regarding the assurance of quality and safety in patient care, speaking up is paramount, particularly in mixed-profession groups. Speaking up requires specific competencies and depends on individuals' motivation to do so. Interprofessional identity (IPI) is a specific source of intrinsic motivation for interprofessional collaboration (IPC). Little is known about its relationship with speaking up. This study aims to investigate whether conversational topics act as triggers of IPI affecting speaking-up behaviour, and whether the strength of their influence varies across different conversational topics.

Methods: Participants of this study were 41 dental bachelor and 43 dental hygiene students. IPI was measured using the Extended Professional Identity Scale (EPIS) eight weeks prior to a simulation session (not a training). Students were assigned into weak or strong identity conditions based on EPIS scores. Small mixed-profession groups with four to five members were formed based on their identity condition and in alphabetic order. Every mixed-profession group discussed eight conversational topics. Groups listed up to ten ideas per topic. The number of ideas generated per topic in each group was used to measure speaking up. A higher idea percentage in the strong IPI group indicated activated IPI, reflecting identity-congruent behaviour.

Results: Mixed-profession groups with relatively strong IPI showed more speaking up than groups with weak identifiers. Conversational topics can trigger IPI to varying degrees, reflected in differing levels of speaking up.

Conclusion: Some topics raise awareness of IPI, boosting speaking up in groups with relatively strong IPI. Using Extended Professional Identity Theory (EPIT) and effective IPI triggers in simulations helps trigger this behaviour. Moreover, reflective debriefing is likely to further support IPI and encourage speaking up.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare Nursing-General Nursing
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.00%
发文量
287
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare (JMDH) aims to represent and publish research in healthcare areas delivered by practitioners of different disciplines. This includes studies and reviews conducted by multidisciplinary teams as well as research which evaluates or reports the results or conduct of such teams or healthcare processes in general. The journal covers a very wide range of areas and we welcome submissions from practitioners at all levels and from all over the world. Good healthcare is not bounded by person, place or time and the journal aims to reflect this. The JMDH is published as an open-access journal to allow this wide range of practical, patient relevant research to be immediately available to practitioners who can access and use it immediately upon publication.
×
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