Nutrition education is an integral part of dental education as well as a variety of other healthcare professions1, but interprofessional education (IPE) between the fields of dietetics and dental hygiene is limited. The purpose of this pilot study was to define areas of opportunity to establish a foundation for the implementation of complimentary curriculum between the dietetics and dental hygiene programs at ETSU. A 76-question survey was developed and administered to dietetic interns (n=26), dental hygiene students (n=49), dietetic faculty (n=23), and dental hygiene faculty (n=19) at ETSU and Baylor College of Dentistry at Texas A&M Health Science Center. Data analysis reveals a knowledge proficiency deficit in dental hygiene students related to nutrition and oral health as well as significant findings in perceived roles of the ‘other’ profession. The potential for interdisciplinary education and training between dietetic and dental hygiene students at ETSU is promising, potentially leading to improved patient care.

No description available.

No description available.

Teamwork is essential to provide quality services to individuals with disabilities (Morrison & Gleddie, 2019). Deficits across a variety of domains make interprofessional practice even more crucial (Dobbs-Oates & Morris, 2016). Interprofessional education (IPE) provides preprofessionals the opportunity to gain experience collaborating with various disciplines, better preparing them for interprofessional practice (Anderson et al., 2011; Ruebling, et al., 2014). Most IPE research has been completed with preprofessionals engaged in medical cases. The existing evidence for IPE in school-based settings is limited, which creates a gap for speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who are pursuing work in school-based settings. The first purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions and attitudes of participants following an IPE experience of a medical case with both quantitative and qualitative data. The second purpose of this study was to determine if a case could be adapted to a school-based setting. Seventy-one participants completed a survey following an IPE experience with eight later participating in a focus group. Preprofessionals self-reported interprofessional learning from the experience and recognized the importance of team interactions. The IPE experience was successfully adapted to a school-based case and in an initial program evaluation, perception of teamwork and interactions were also important. In both settings, preprofessionals rated themselves as having less bias towards others than others have towards their own disciplines. This study provides essential information regarding IPE for school-based settings that will ultimately benefit children with disabilities by encouraging interprofessional practice.

Occupational therapy (OT) and applied behavior analysis (ABA) practitioners often collaborate when working with children and young adults with disabilities (McGinnis, 2013). OT and ABA practitioners are primed to collaborate due to many areas of overlap among each respective scope of practice; however, there is limited research to guide best practice for this collaborative partnership (Welch & Polatajko, 2016). According to a review of OT and ABA literature, in addition to the literature of other community-based, social services, and health care professions, there are four major barriers to interprofessional collaboration (IPC): (1) biases, (2) differing cultures, values, and professional languages, (3) overlaps in scopes of practice, and (4) poor communication and relationship-building skills (Kim et al., 2016; Peck & Norman, 1999; Rice et al., 2010). Due to a limited amount of accessible OT and ABA training interventions on collaboration, there is a need for an online, interactive, educational training to present evidence-based and theoretically-sound solutions for the barriers to collaboration. The proposed program is called Supporting Interprofessional Partnerships: An Educational Training for Collaboration Between Occupational Therapy and Applied Behavior Analysis Practitioners. The program’s educational content targets: (1) the definition, benefits, and barriers to IPC, (2) context-based information on ABA’s culture, values, professional language, and scope of practice, and (3) strategies to improve collaboration with ABA providers. Supporting Interprofessional Partnerships explores the working relationship between OT and ABA to improve collaboration as well as client, family, provider, and organizational outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Interprofessional education (IPE) is the organized integration of health care disciplines. IPE provides an environment for students and faculty from multiple disciplines to learn collaboration and communication skills for future clinical practice. In the 1970s, United States health institutions began focusing on team-based health care and IPE. IPE was viewed as a solution to the growing burden of health care costs and the increasing ratio of diseases to available resources. IPE was formed around four competencies--Ethics, Communication, Teamwork, and Roles and Responsibilities--to provide students with the necessary tools to work efficiently in health care teams upon entering the workforce. FOCUS AND GOALS: USF Health currently has five major pre-professional disciplines on its campus--medicine, physical therapy, pharmacy, nursing, and public health. An IPE initiative began in 2010 in order to eventually integrate portions of all disciplines and their curricula. The central question of this thesis is, "Has there been a change within the student and faculty populations of USF Health in terms of IPE awareness and opinion since before the IPE initiative began in 2010?" This thesis aims to evaluate the changes in both student and faculty perspectives across several health disciplines at USF Health when compared to previously recorded perspectives from 2010. This information will be recorded to provide a guide for improving the current IPE initiative at USF Health. METHODS: Using data from a 2010 survey, the researchers created an updated survey and released it to the students and faculty of all five disciplines. The results provided a comparison for the original 2010 data. A general literature review was used to supplement the collected survey results and guide the analysis and discussion of data. Results: The qualitative data from the original student (n=29) and faculty (n=58) surveys was quantified and compared against the data from the updated student (n=83) and faculty (n=16) surveys. Several consistent themes were found in responses from selected questions. The following themes were found within the literature: student and faculty perspectives of IPE, barriers and opportunities to IPE, and implementation methods. CONCLUSION: The study found that changes in opinion occurred between both student and faculty participants. Both students and faculty showed an increase in IPE awareness and alluded to several barriers that were also found within the literature. This study will serve as a continued method of evaluating IPE at USF health in order to maintain a continued improvement of IPE implementation amongst all colleges. LIMITATIONS: The initial student data set was significantly smaller than the new student data set and represented a different distribution of disciplines. This may account for some of the changes observed between both groups and should be considered in any future analysis of this data. Because the data presented in this thesis project is a preliminary sample of the future, complete survey results, a follow-up analysis of the complete data will be required to draw any comprehensive conclusions from this study.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.