A Comparison of Four Model of IPE

A large Academic Health Science Center faces unique challenges in meeting the accreditation needs of 5 colleges housing 18 different programs, subspecialties, and concentrations some of which have exclusively online learners. A longitudinal one-year IPE experience was developed to provide IPE to on-ground learners from 4 colleges: Clinical and Rehabilitative Health Sciences, Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, and Public Health. Afterward, a year-long program mirroring the on-ground program was developed to bring IPE to online learners from 3 colleges: Clinical and Rehabilitative Health Sciences, Nursing, and Public Health. This online program was informative in guiding the shift from on-ground programming to an entirely online program during the Pandemic; two hours of the previous four-hour session moved to an asynchronous delivery as pre-work and the final two hours were delivered synchronously online through a Zoom meeting platform. The transition back to in-person has provided a fourth model of IPE at this same institution, with the two hours of asynchronous pre-work continuing for the on-ground program followed by a two-hour in-person simulated experiential learning session. In all four models of IPE, evaluation data has been captured from faculty and students following each of the four modules delivered each year. The evaluative data collected throughout the evolution of IPE during the pandemic organically renders itself into a retrospective analysis comparing these four models of IPE.<br><br>This lightning talk will provide a comparison of content across models of IPE delivered at this institution, a comparison of evaluation data from faculty and students, and a summary of lessons learned. Attendees will learn how course developers worked together to use the evaluative data to improve content and processes between models from year to year. We will uncover and address the strengths and weaknesses of the training models and identify how we overcame barriers in content delivery. Approaches for supporting faculty and students will be included as part of the recommendations for building a strong program to support IPE. Ideas for the next steps in continuing to grow the program will be offered.<br><br>We will provide a bullet point summary of lessons learned and noted strengths for attendees as a pdf.<br><br>Objectives:<br>• Describe four models of IPE.<br>• Review the strengths and weaknesses of four models of IPE.<br>• Explain the use of evaluative data in the quality improvement process in IPE.<br>• Identify lessons learned and suggestions for future development in the delivery of IPE.