An interventional study of Interprofessional case-based learning in Interprofessional Education, Continuing Professional Development and Education, sponsored by Rigshospitalet, Denmark. Terminated at 1 site in Denmark. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-09-09.
Sponsored by Rigshospitalet, Denmark · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research
Interprofessional education in childhood cancer is a multifaceted field. It involves multiple healthcare professionals with general and specialised knowledge and skills. Complex treatment, care and rehabilitation require continuous professional development and maintenance of healthcare professionals' competencies in their own professional field. Limited knowledge exists on comparing interprofessional and monoprofessional education and only few randomised studies have evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of interprofessional education. One clinical area among others where healthcare professionals collaborate is in gastrointestinal toxicities and side effects. These are frequent and potentially severe clinical problems in childhood cancer that involve multiple healthcare professionals.
Objectives: To study the effect of interprofessional versus monoprofessional case-based learning on healthcare professionals' attitudes on interprofessional learning and collaboration.
Trial design: single centre investigator-initiated cluster randomized trial
Methods:
Participants: Employees with patient-related work at the childhood cancer departments and affiliated with childhood cancer at Rigshospitalet are eligible for inclusion. The setting is the childhood cancer department.
Outcome: The primary outcome is to improve healthcare professionals' interprofessional attitude.
Measurements:
The primary outcome is attitudes measured by the Assessment of Interprofessional Team Collaboration Scale (AITCS). Secondary outcome is Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) Questionnaire, and Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ). Knowledge will be measured by written test as multiple choice questionnaire (MCQ).
Timepoints: The self-reported questionnaires will be distributed to the participants approximately one month before and one month after the educational intervention. On the day of the educational intervention, participants will answer the multiple choice questionnaire.
Analysis: Linear mixed regression will be used to compare differences in mean scores postintervention, adjusted for differences between the two groups.
Results: We hypothesise that interprofessional case-based learning positively affects the healthcare professionals' interprofessional attitudes.
Rigshospitalet, Denmark is the lead sponsor of 1,017 studies on the registry; 183 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
The experimental intervention will be the interprofessional group receiving case-based learning about gastro-intestinal toxicities and side effects of children and adolescents with cancer.
Other: Interprofessional case-based learning
The control group is the monoprofessional group that will receive the same case-based learning as the intervention group.
Other: Interprofessional case-based learning
The trial is an educational intervention where groups of healthcare professionals receive the same case-based learning: one group receives case-based learning with healthcare professionals of various professional backgrounds (experimental) versus another group receiving case-based learning with healthcare professionals exclusively of the same professional background (control). The educational intervention consists of a case that is developed for the purpose of the intervention. The participants in the experimental group will be randomised into six teams who will receive interprofessional case-based learning. The experimental group will be made up of healthcare professionals from various groups. The participants in the control group will be randomised in groups of one profession
Change in the participants' interprofessional collaboration
Primary outcome: change in the participants' interprofessional attitude to collaboration measured by Assessment of interprofessional Team Collaboration Scale (AITCS). The scale contains three main categories: 1)Partnership/shared decision making (19 items), 2) Collaboration (11 items), 3) Coordination (7 items) that are rated on a scale from 1-5 (1= "never"; 2= "rarely"; 3="occasionally"; 4="most of the time"; 5="Always"). The scales procedures scores from 48 to 240. Higher scores indicate a better outcome
Time frame: Measured 1 month before intervention and 1-3 months after intervention in both groups
Change in the participants' interprofessional attitudes
Secondary outcome: measured by Change in Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Survey (RIPLS). 29 items on a five-point scale 4 subscales; 1)Teamwork and collaboration, 2)Negative professional identity, 3)Positive professional identity, 4)Roles and responsibility. The items are rated on a scale from 1-5 (1= "strongly disagree"; 2= "agree"; 3="undecided"; 4="agree"; 5="strongly agree"). Higher scores indicate a better outcome
Time frame: Measured 1 month before intervention and 1-3 months after intervention in both groups
Change in participants' knowledge of gastrointestinal toxicities and side effects
measured by written test as multiple choice questionnaire (MCQ). There are three options to chose from in this multiple choice questionnaire, one correct answer and two wrong answers. This MCQ is developed and validated for the purpose of this particular education session
Time frame: measured at the actual intervention day 30 minutes prior to the session and immediately after the education session (maximum 15 minutes after)
Plan to share: No — Randomisation is performed centrally by a computer-generated allocation sequence concealed for the investigators
This study is terminated, as verified in Sep 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Rigshospitalet, Denmark