Optimising student-led interprofessional learning across eleven health disciplines

BACKGROUND: Provision of effective Interprofessional learning (IPL) opportunities plays a vital role in preparing healthcare students for future collaborative practice. There is an identified need for universities to better prepare students for interprofessional teamwork, however, few large-scale IPL activities have been reported. Additionally, little has been reported on disciplinary differences in student learning experience. The Health Collaboration Challenge (HCC) is a large-scale IPL activity held annually at the University of Sydney. This study sought to explore students’ experience of early participation in an interprofessional case-based learning activity, and the similarities and differences in the perceived value of interprofessional (social) learning for each discipline. METHODS: In 2018, 1674 students from 11 disciplines (dentistry, oral health, nursing, pharmacy, medicine, occupational therapy, speech pathology, physiotherapy, dietetics, diagnostic radiography, exercise physiology) participated in the HCC. Students worked in teams to produce a video and patient management plan based on a patient case. Participants completed a questionnaire, including closed and open-ended items. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Thematic analysis was used to code and categorise qualitative data into themes. These themes were then applied and quantified at a disciplinary level to measure prevalence. RESULTS: In total, 584/1674 (35%) of participants responded to the questionnaire. Overall, students perceived their experience to be largely beneficial to their learning and interprofessional skill development. Positive aspects included opportunities for peer learning, collaboration, networking, and understanding the different roles and responsibilities of other health professions. Negative aspects included the video form of assessment, inequity in assessment weighting across disciplines, the discipline mix within teams and lack of case relevance. CONCLUSION: The learning activity provided a framework for students to practice and develop their skills in interprofessional teamwork, as they prepare for increased clinical placements. Overall, students perceived their experience as beneficial to their learning and professional development early in their degree. However, they expressed dissatisfaction with the inequity of assessment weighting across the disciplines; lack of relevance of the case across disciplines; and the activity of producing a video. Further research is needed regarding the ideal number of disciplines to include in teamwork specific to a patient case.