Athletic Training Educators’ Perceptions of Collaborative Practice when Infusing Interprofessional Education
Poster Description: The purpose of this study was to explore US athletic trainer (AT) educators’ perception of collaborative practice (CP) when infusing interprofessional education (IPE) within the curriculum and to determine how a participant’s demographics might have influenced their perception of interprofessional collaboration. This study was non-experimental, cross-sectional, and exploratory. An online survey was employed, containing both quantitative and qualitative questions. The quantitative questions secured demographic data and included the modified Perceptions of Interprofessional Collaboration Model Questionnaire (PINCOM-Q). Descriptive statistics, measures of central tendency and chi-square analysis were used to describe the demographics, results of the PINCOM-Q and the associations between certain demographic variables and the PINCOM-Q mean score.
Quantitative data revealed AT educators appear to have an overall agreeable and positive perception of interprofessional collaboration with a mean score of 2.5549 from a 7-point Likert scale (1-rating was “strongly agree”). Chi-square analysis of the PINCOM-Q mean score and certain demographics revealed several significant findings with reported p-values < .05. Specifically, AT educators who identified as having formal training in IPE, had greater than 3 years of teaching experience, had more than 1 year of teaching experience in IPE, and had an estimated 1-10 hours of IPE instruction per academic year, were likely to agree with the statements presented in the PINCOM-Q.
The qualitative questions sought to further explore faculty’s IPE training and the role of IPE within their teaching responsibilities. Participants qualitative responses were decoded, then encoded using an inductive approach translating participant responses into codes, categories, and themes by the PI. Intercoder agreement was secured throughout the process. Themes that emerged from the qualitative questions revealed IPE training can exist in several modes and can be structured, unstructured, or a combination of both; IPE requires an investment and commitment in an educator’s time and is not a ‘one and done’ experience, and learning IPE must be sought out by the individual.
Themes that emerged from their role as an IPE educator described responsibilities involving teaching outside of the AT program and IPE incorporated within a student’s clinical experience. In conclusion, the quantitative and qualitative data secured in this study focusing on AT educators’ perceptions of collaborative practice when infusing IPE can further aide AT educators in designing effective and meaningful IPE experiences for AT students and the other professional students they collaborate with. Ultimately, enhancing their workforce readiness skills.
