Explorative study identifies key factors influencing interprofessional competence in health education, suggesting tailored interactions matter.
Interprofessional training wards (ITWs) are established educational formats to foster interprofessional (IP) competence in health professions education. While previous research has demonstrated their overall effectiveness, little is known about which specific factors within ITW placements drive final levels and gains of IP competence and whether these mechanisms differ across professions. In an explorative study, 151 participants (105 medical students, 23 trainee nurses, 23 trainee physiotherapists) completed their placement on the ITW. Their self-reported data were used for hierarchical multiple regression analyses to identify predictive factors of perceived final levels and gains of IP competence at the end of the placement. For medical students and trainee nurses, the perceived quality of IP interaction during the placement was the strongest predictor of both final level and gain of IP competence (p < .001 and p < .01, respectively). Frequency of IP interaction contributed to learning gain (p < .05 and n.s., respectively) but explained less variance than interaction quality. Initial IP competence predicted final level of IP competence for medical students but not gain of IP competence. No significant predictors of IP competence development were identified for trainee physiotherapists. This study advances IP education research by shifting the focus from the effectiveness of ITWs to the mechanisms underlying IP competence development. High-quality IP collaboration emerges as a key driver of perceived IP competence development. The findings highlight the importance of intentionally designing and facilitating IP interaction and suggest that learning mechanisms may differ across professions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hirth et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: