Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Effective knowledge sharing and professional networking are critical for enhancing healthcare practice. The Intravenous and Parenteral Nutrition (IVPN) Network, originally focused on nutrition support, has expanded into a global platform supporting professional development across multiple disciplines. However, its broader impact on healthcare providers' growth and practice remains underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the perceived influence of the IVPN Network through four objectives: (1) to assess awareness and usage, (2) to identify training needs, (3) to evaluate its impact on professional development, collaboration, and patient care, and (4) to measure user satisfaction and advocacy. METHODS: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted between September 2024 and January 2025 using non-probability snowball sampling. Eligible participants were pharmacists, healthcare providers, and researchers aged ≥18 years who had engaged with IVPN activities within the past two years. The questionnaire, developed from literature and validated by experts (Cronbach's alpha ≥ 0.79), included demographic items and Likert-scale questions across the four study domains. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Mann-Whitney U tests were used for sex-based comparisons, Pearson correlation for age and performance scores, and Kruskal-Wallis tests for training effects. RESULTS: A total of 493 healthcare professionals from 39 countries responded, with the majority from the Gulf region. Awareness of the IVPN Network was relatively high, although patterns of engagement varied. Formal or informal training was significantly associated with higher perceived benefits. Participants reported that the network enhanced access to clinical information, communication, and decision-making, and supported professional collaboration. Overall satisfaction was high, with 95.1% indicating they would recommend the platform. CONCLUSION: The IVPN Network is perceived to support professional development and collaboration among healthcare providers across diverse regions. While findings provide valuable insights into members' experiences, they reflect self-reported perceptions and cannot be interpreted as causal effects due to the cross-sectional design, reliance on subjective data, and absence of control groups. Future research should incorporate longitudinal designs, objective clinical outcome measures, and independent evaluations to confirm and extend these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barakat et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: