SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

vol.52 issue1Informal caregivers for stroke survivors: what does occupational therapy offer? author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand



Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • On index processSimilars in Google


South African Journal of Occupational Therapy

On-line version ISSN 2310-3833
Print version ISSN 0038-2337

S. Afr. j. occup. ther. vol.52 n.1 Pretoria Apr. 2022 



Factors to consider in planning a tailored undergraduate interprofessional education and collaborative practice curriculum: A scoping review



Hanlie PitoutI, *; Fasloen AdamsII; Daleen CasteleijnIII; Sanetta Henrietta Johanna du ToitIV

IB Occ Ther (UP), M Occ Ther (UL).; Lecturer, Occupational Therapy. School of Health Care Sciences, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, South Africa
IIBOT (SU), MScOT (UCT), PhD (Wits).; Lecturer, Division of Occupational Therapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, South Africa
IIIB Occ Ther (Pret), B Occ Ther (Hons)(Medunsa), Dip Voc Rehab (Pret), DHETP (Pret), M Occ Ther (Pret), PhD (Pret).; Associate Professor (Retired), Occupational Therapy Department, School of Therapeutic Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
IVB Occ Ther (UFS), M Occ Ther (UFS), MSc Occ Ther (University of Exeter, UK), PhD (UFS).; Senior Lecturer (Level C), Occupational Therapy Department, University of Sydney, Australia, Senior Research Fellow with the University of the Freestate, South Africa




BACKGROUND: Heath care students need to be practice-ready at qualification. Increased interest in and drive towards more collaborative practice necessitate consideration of teaching and learning factors unique to learning settings, to plan a tailored interprofessional education and collaborative practice curriculum, based on empirical findings
METHOD: The Joanna Briggs Institute's scoping review methodology guided this study. Eight online databases were searched, with 72 articles included for full review. Charted data, analysed quantitatively, included year, context, study design and population. The four-dimensional curriculum framework model, consisting of future health care needs, interprofessional competencies, methods of teaching and institutional support, directed the deductive analysis
RESULTS: Interprofessional education is best presented as a tailored curriculum, i.e. fitting the specific institution's needs, based on formal rather than a voluntary participation and presented longitudinally. Buy-in from institutional management assists in overcoming barriers related to resourcing and staff participation
CONCLUSION: Successful interprofessional education and collaborative practice curricula are dependent on an interplay of various factors such as specific professions involved, future healthcare needs of the country, expected capabilities and competencies of graduates, content and teaching methods, and available resources. Facilitators, as well as policymakers of academic and clinical institutions, could benefit from the synthesized evidence

Keywords: interprofessional learning, pre-licensure, Joanna Briggs, four-dimensional curriculum model, graduate competencies




The increasing complexity of patients' needs has influenced health professional education and health policy and as a result, has strengthened a drive for preparing a "collaborative practice-ready" health workforce to respond to local health needs1. Despite well-evidenced advantages of Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice (IPECP), the continued lack of implementation as part of undergraduate curricula, may be related to limited attention to factors that influence planning of a tailored IPECP curriculum. This scoping review initiated a research process for planning a university specific IPECP programme in South Africa.

Literature describing IPECP curriculum planning in Africa is limited. A variety of published documents, e.g., interprofessional education and practice guides and competency frameworks from different countries, such as, Australia2, USA3 and Canada4, are available. However, despite the value of competency frameworks and practice guides for curriculum planning, these guides have a limited evidence base and mostly rely on field experts' experience5.

Most models guiding curriculum development either use a linear approach or do not explicitly address IPECP competencies e.g., Kern curriculum design model, Context, Input, Process and Product (CIPP model), Biggs model6. In contrast, the four-dimensional curriculum framework (4DF) was specifically developed for IPECP7. The scope of the 4DF allows curriculum planners to shape the IPECP curriculum, offering the most comprehensive learning activities8. Although the 4DF has been applied in a range of studies9,10, none indicated its use to develop a tailored IPECP curriculum.

When a university plans an IPECP programme, the unique context and how it differs from what available literature describes, should be considered. The 4DF guides tailored curriculum development to include (1) health care needs and available resources; (2) application of IPECP competencies; (3) teaching, learning and assessment variations; (4) institutional support and available resources.

The African context has unique challenges related to healthcare needs of the population and in equitability of available resources to ensure quality of life. In addition, within South Africa, implementation of IPECP programmes differ vastly due to lack of clear policy, differing IPECP competency applications and the level of commitment by university management. For example, health profession accreditation bodies or councils e.g., the Health Professions Council of South Africa11, expect universities to include interprofessional education in their curricula. However, when professional accreditation bodies do not apply uniform guidelines on how IPECP should be incorporated into curricula of different professions, it causes additional challenges for planners of IPECP curricula that deals with a large variety of professions9.

The scoping review forms part of the first author's PhD study aimed at developing an IPECP module for final year health care students at a South African university. The objective of this review was to identify the factors that affect planning of a tailored undergraduate IPECP curriculum by identifying, analysing, and synthesising relevant articles.



The five-step Joanna Briggs12 scoping review method was followed:

Stage 1: Identifying the research question

The research question was: What is known, from the published, peer-reviewed literature about the factors that influence the planning of a tailored IPECP curriculum for health care professionals?

Stage 2: Identifying relevant articles

A search strategy including seven databases (MEDLINE, CI-NAHL, Science Direct, PubMed, NexusIPE, Scopus) as well as Google Scholar search engine identified articles in English between 2009 and 2020. The Boolean search phrases were:

"Interprofessional education" AND "Collaborative practice" AND/OR "Interprofessional learning"

"Planning" OR "Development"

"Undergraduate students" OR "Undergraduates" OR "Pre-Qualification students" OR "pre licensure"

"Curriculum" OR "Programme" OR "Module"

The articles reviewed included: participants who were undergraduate students enrolled in a health care professional programme, as well as course developers, and experts in IPECP. The included article context focused on curricula delivered at universities in classrooms clinical settings, and in urban or rural areas. Articles published globally were considered. Inclusion criteria for concepts covered "interprofessional education", "interprofessional learning" and/or "collaborative practice".

Initial exclusion criteria were studies that focused on single activities (e.g., oncology ward rounds), postgraduate students, qualified health care professionals, and non-health care professional students.

Stage 3: Study selection (please refer to PRISMA guide, Figure 1, page 80)



Selection was based on initial screening by title (n = 25704), then abstract (n=1324) and lastly full text (n=72). Two team members reviewed the articles and referred any disagreements to a third reviewer for the final decision for inclusion12. The search strategy was refined after the initial research yielded a large number of articles. One of the main additional inclusion criteria added is that only empirical research articles in peer-reviewed journals were included. After initial screening it was decided that all articles based on secondary data with no evidence (e.g., guidelines) as well as literature summaries (as these could have been based on primary articles) were also excluded. Seventy-two articles were included and analysed. Figure 1 (page 80) summarises the study inclusion process after applying the refined inclusion criteria.

Stage 4: Charting the data

The author/s, publication year, title and journal information, country (study location), context (university or clinical setting), research method/study design, study population (e.g., students or experts, their level as juniors/seniors, their professions), were charted using Microsoft Excel. See addendum A.

Stage 5: Collating, summarising, and reporting the results

Quantifiable data were analysed descriptively, and a deductive qualitative thematic analysis based on the 4DF7 directed the thematic analysis. For included articles please refer to addendum A, page 88.



Quantitative data are presented in a narrative descriptive format. (The included articles are identified with an asterisk* in the reference list.)

Descriptive summary of demographic information

Participants: Of the 72 articles reviewed, 15 (20.8%) included key role players, e.g., IPECP experts, or course developers as participants. The remaining 57 (79.2%) of articles consisted of students as participants.

Course progression: Twenty-eight (49%) of the 57 articles that focused on students indicated that senior students participated, 16 (28%) focused specifically on first year students, and 13 (23 %) did not specify the year group of participants. Professions: Nursing was the most represented profession with 42 (58.3%) studies followed by physiotherapy and medicine with 28 (38.8%) each, and occupational therapy and pharmacy with 26 (36%) each. A variety and different combinations of professions participated, from at least two up to 10 professions per session. The most frequent number of professionals included in a session were six as mentioned in 47 studies (65.3%), followed by five professions mentioned in 9 studies (12.5%) and three to four professions mentioned in eight studies each (22.2%).

Number of participants: A vastly different number of students were included in IPECP sessions, ranging from less than a 100 to 1 873 students. Not all studies mentioned the number of students. Of the 46 studies (64%) where the number of participants was stated, most studies, 24 (52.2%) reported on participation of less than 100 students, but seven (15.2%) involved more than 1 000 students. Fifteen studies (32.6%) reported on small group teaching, with student numbers varying between three to 14 students per group.

Country: Only five studies (6.9%) from Africa met the inclusion criteria. The majority of the included studies, 48 (66.6%), were from countries with IPECP competency frameworks - 15 (20.8%) each from USA and Australia, and nine (12.5%) each from Canada and UK.

Geographical considerations: The geographical suitability for offering joint IPECP activities refers to the availability of a variety of professions at the same university. Universities who do not offer courses to a variety of health care professions relied on nearby universities to join their IPECP initiatives13. Only three studies (4%) focussed on exposure of students to rural communities14,15,16, one study described a mobile outreach exposure17 and one study referred to exposure to a non-profit organisation18. The rest of the articles referred to studies in the local area where the university was located.

Focus of the programme: Six articles (8.3%) focused on the importance of a theoretical model to guide planning. The majority of articles, (45=62.5%) addressed interprofessional education in classroom settings. Eleven articles (15.3%) included only interprofessional collaboration and 10 (13.9%) focused on both education and collaboration.

Descriptive summary of factors according to the four dimensions framework

The data were analysed deductively using the 4DF. The 4DF guided the mapping of thematic data to each dimension. Findings are presented under each of the four dimensions. Figure 2 (above) provides a visual representation of the dimensions and associated factors.



Dimension 1: Identifying future health care needs -preparing and capacity building to ensure meeting the needs of the population

The planning of an IPECP curriculum should address the training needs of the health work force, i.e., the need for and required competencies of the included professions and consider national policy related to health care worker training and health care delivery.

Policy considerations: National policies address the political, social, and cultural factors that influence health care worker training and health care delivery. Positive results were achieved with a nationally driven and coordinated approach, associated with research i.e., coordinated nationally amongst universities and departments of health and embedded in government policies19,20.

Health workforce training: An awareness of specific population health care needs, e.g., identifying care contexts and the variety of professionals needed, should inform training20. IPECP can conserve resources when professionals are aware of their unique roles and duplication of services are prevented18.

Dimension 2: Defining and understanding interprofessional capabilities required for future success in practice

When planning to address the capabilities of the health care workers in the IPECP curriculum, environmental needs and staff requirements need consideration. IPECP Curriculum: IPECP should be part of a profession's core curriculum and not seen as optional21. The curriculum needs to be presented as a tailored programme based on the specific needs of the included professions22. To tailor the curriculum, planners need to identify shared prioritised themes for the specific professions involved, for example case studies where the role of each profession is overt23. Learning and teaching activities should be staggered and graded from theoretical appreciation to placement learning, to examining the complexity of modern teamwork in a range of clinical settings6. The advances in students' knowledge and experience should reflect the increasing complexity of IPECP activities24.

Time frames for IPECP curriculum implementation were disputed25. For example, Wilbur and Kelly26 stressed starting in first year, to allow for exposure before biases develop, in contrast to Imafuku et al.27, who found it advantageous to start with final year students with an established sense of their own roles that they could apply during placements. Setting/environment: Positive safe spaces, which could be shared, or neutral spaces, are experienced as supportive and conducive to learning and thus enable students to explore beliefs, learn to network professionally and to reflect on their own and others' personal and professional culture and values28,29. Clinical settings need to allow students opportunities to observe the real world and learn about the respective professions and their interprofessional roles30,31. Facilitator requirements: Planning IPECP is a complex and dynamic process32 requiring an interprofessional team actively involved in planning and development33. IPECP facilitators/trained lecturers, need to be both familiar with the institutions' environment, and skilled in facilitation and student supervision34, Facilitators should rather self-identify and be able to role model teamwork and be passionate about IPECP34,35.

Dimension 3: Teaching, learning and assessment to address the development of core competencies Teaching, learning and assessment: Specific teaching and learning components need to be tailored to student variables (who), context (where), timing (when), content (what) and teaching methods (how). When grouping students, planners need to appreciate, acknowledge and maximise diversity24. It is advisable to use intentional grouping of students (focused, heterogeneous in terms of gender, age, professions and cultures)36, in groups with students of four to five professions37. Learning activities need to ensure students appreciate each other's roles and contributions while being able to acknowledge both the usefulness as well as the limitations of their own knowledge38. Jernigan et al.39 therefore suggested authentic case studies, with significant clinical detail, necessitating involvement of the interprofessional team for problem solving and encouraging clinical reasoning.

Findings highlighted theoretical frameworks conducive to IPECP including Social Capital Theory40 Socio Cultural Learning41, Problem Based Learning42 Complexity Theory24 and Constructivist Theory43. Andragogical strategies to consider incorporated blended, face-to-face, flipped classroom, interactive and experiential learning/teach-ing44. Rosenfield et al.45 caution about the use of large-scale activities as it could limit the amount of meaningful interaction. Assessments need to be aligned instructional methods with required outcomes46.

Students input: Senior students, especially in their final year of study, can provide valuable input to curriculum development47. Students could comment on internal factors (insight and motivation to participate) as well as factors outside the programme (logistics and timing), that impact students' participation, due to their lived experience of the profession specific and IPECP curriculum48. Students identified authentic learning opportunities as experiencing problem solving in class, simulation, and clinical practice. Students appreciated opportunities to socialise both formally and informally with peers from other professions49.

Dimension 4: Supporting institutional delivery

For long-term sustainability, IPECP needs to be part of the collective institutional vision50, be embedded on symbolic and organisational culture levels35 and part of a valued curriculum48. The characteristics of the institution and available resources requires special consideration. Characteristics of the Institution: Multi-tiered support is required from committed staff members, both academics and clinicians, institution leadership/management and governmental stakeholders50. Pragmatic considerations include faculty timetabling, structural complexities of university partnerships, institutional systems and processes51. Physical, attitudinal, and human resources: IPECP is resource and time intensive, due to significant coordination required52. Centralised planning at a university, where planning is coordinated between different professions and involved schools could collectively address the logistics of implementation33. Focused effort to provide resources or infrastructure, necessitates inclusion of strong administrative support24. Attention should be on capacity to deliver the curriculum, e.g., sufficient human resources in terms of trained facilitators and sufficient administrative support. I n addition, there should also be a concerted effort made to overcome perceived challenges such as time constraints in the time-table and lack of funds to present the programme53,54.



This review revealed a growing body of literature that describes factors influencing IPECP planning. Articles increased steadily from 2009 to 2020, reflecting the possibility that more universities incorporated IPECP on a larger scale into their curriculum; or more research conducted into the planning of IPECP curriculum. Analysis of the 72 articles found most originated in countries where government policies as well as competency frameworks for IPECP are in place. The benefit of having such support is acknowledged. In South Africa, as in many other African countries, the policies of IPECP are emergent. Even though an abundance of international literature is available, few South African specific guidelines were found. Nevertheless, the authors gained an in-depth understanding of intertwined factors to consider when planning and IPECP curriculum and realized the gaps for the South African context.

The descriptive summary of factors according to the four dimensions reflected the dynamic interaction between the four dimensions. Specific professions, future healthcare needs, expected capabilities, curriculum content, teaching methods and available resources impacted one another.

It was evident that local, national, and international health and education policies influence IPECP application20. For a tailored curriculum, planners need to be cognisant of the purpose and content of the policies, while aligning the curriculum with the specific institution's mission and vision. In the South African context, the impact of possible changes related to the proposed National Health Insurance needs specific consideration when developing a national IPECP policy. ASSAF55 proposed embedding IPECP in Health Professions Education in South Africa, as a multi-stakeholder, to make it more sustainable, by forming a national working group to develop and guide the implementation of a strategic plan for IPECP. The requirements of included professions' professional regulators, e.g., Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) consisting of different professional boards for different professions, in addition to the Nursing Council and Pharmacy Council, need to be considered when the programme is planned. If the specific expectations in terms of IPECP of these regulators could be same, it would make it easier for programme planners to plan the curriculum for a range of stakeholders. Organisations such as the South African Association of Health Educationalists (SAAHE) and the African Interprofessional Education Network (AfrIPEN), where IPECP experts work together to develop policies and resources for IPECP, contribute to growth in IPECP.

Worldwide there is an increasing demand for trained health care workers. From the scoped articles it became clear that IPECP in Africa is not as established as it is in developed economies56, and one possible reason is the lack of national policies guiding IPECP. South Africa, with its particular geographical, socio-economic, cultural diversity, resource limitations and political history, has both universal as well as some unique challenges when it comes to the need for IPECP. The quadruple burden of disease in South Africa namely challenges in maternal, new-born and child health; HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis (TB); non-communicable diseases; and violence and injury combined with insufficient resources and the influence of poverty and workforce shortages makes the need for IPECP even more pronounced34. In tailoring a curriculum, the health work force needs of the specific included professions, individually and collectively, must be considered. For example, include the common conditions treated by the profession, to ensure that the IPECP activities are authentic and reflect practice needs57. IPECP could contribute to address health care's triple aim for improving patient experience quality and satisfaction with care, and through this addressing the health of the population and reduce the per capita cost of health care. Through collaborative practice patient care could be rendered more effectively by preventing unnecessary delays in care, unnecessary duplication of services and avoiding the need for re-admission because patients were discharged prematurely. IPECP forms an important part of the plans of the National Health Insurance which emphasizes the need for patients to be treated by a team58.

To present a tailored curriculum, the IPECP core competencies, that guide the outcomes of the IPECP curriculum and therefore the selection of learning opportunities (activities, teaching methods and assessment methods), need to determine the duration and timing of the curriculum. Selected learning opportunities should suit the student characteristics for example the needs of the year group and combination of professions involved3. IPECP then facilitate the dual identity development of students as professional and as interprofessional team members59,3. In the South African context, it is important to pay attention to the type of case study that is most relevant to the specific professions involved and to address challenges related to diversity during IPECP group work. Examples could be stroke, head injuries, substance induced psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder, spinal cord injuries.

Facilitators need to understand the institution and the health care system where the programme is presented. Knowledgeable, enthusiastic facilitators who make student's involvement enjoyable, contribute to students' positive attitude to future interprofessional collaboration60.

Student involvement in curriculum planning increase IPECP programme acceptance and involvement60,61. Students who have experienced not only their own professions specific curriculum, but also the IPECP curriculum could share their experience of the learning opportunities' relevance29.

For the sustainability of any IPECP programme, buy-in from the specific institutions' management is vital to overcome logistical barriers, such as financing and provide the necessary resources35,48.

Throughout the review and the discussion, the relevance of sources was contemplated to ensure that it supports the South African context.

Limitations of the scoping review

Due to the abundance of available literature, important articles may have been inadvertently excluded, despite rigorous effort. Only five articles originating in Africa adhered to the inclusion criteria though there was abundance of international articles. This further highlighted the paucity of South African research in IPECP in terms of planning a curriculum relevant for the country's needs. The IPECP articles from Africa focussed more on IPECP implementation and is evident of IPECP in Africa as an emerging research area. Even though the scoping review did not provide sufficient information related to planning a specific South African IPECP curriculum, the discussion did however, indicate how differences in the context could be identified and considered in planning and aligning information to the specific university context.



The results from this scoping review have the potential to guide the planning of a tailored IPECP curriculum for an African university. Several intertwined factors were presented for consideration by curriculum planners and IPECP organisers and presenters. Findings could support university management and policymakers as it provides summarised and synthesised evidence on how to establish a tailored IPECP curriculum. Key considerations include the specific professions involved, future healthcare needs of the country, expected capabilities and competencies of graduates, content and teaching methods and available resources influence one another.

Consideration of unique institutional contexts could guide planning a new or revised IPECP curriculum. A tailored curriculum will ensure that the healthcare needs of the local population is met and that students master interprofessional competencies using context-relevant teaching strategies.



Hanlie Pitout designed the study, collected, and analysed the data and drafted the initial manuscript and revised the manuscript. Fasloen Adams and Sanet du Toit contributed to the study design, supervised the data collection and analysis, and was actively engaged in the writing of the manuscript and Daleen Casteleijn assisted with refining the manuscript for publication. All authors were included in aspects of study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of data; and/or drafting the paper; as well as final approval of the submitted version to be published and agreement to be accountable for included information.



The authors have no declarations of competing interests to make, and no funding was received for this research.



Please note articles included in the scoping review are indicated with a *

1. World Health Organisation. Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. 2010. Geneva, Switzerland (WHO/HRH/HPN/10.3)        [ Links ]

2. O'Keefe, M., Henderson, A. & Chick, R. (2017) Defining a set of common interprofessional learning competencies for health profession students. Medical Teacher, 39(5):463-468. doi:        [ Links ]

3. Health Professions Accreditors Collaborative. (2019). Guidance on developing quality interprofessional education for the health professions. Chicago, IL: Health Professions Accreditors Collaborative.         [ Links ]

4. Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC). (2010). A national interprofessional competency framework. Vancouver, BC.         [ Links ]

5. Reeves, S; Tassone, M., Parker, K., Wagner, SJ, & Simmons, B. (2012). Interprofessional Education: An overview of key developments on the past 3 decades. Work, 41, 233- 245. doi:        [ Links ]

6 Toosi M, Modarres M, Amini M, Geranmayeh M. Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model in medical education: A systematic review. J Educ Health Promot. 2021 May 31;10(1):199. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_1115_20. PMID:34250133; PMCID: PMC8249974        [ Links ]

7. Steketee C, Forman D, Dunston R, Yassine T, Matthews LR, Saunders R, Nicol P, Alliex S. Interprofessional health education in Australia: three research projects informing curriculum renewal and development. Applied Nursing Research. 2014 May; 27(2):115-20. doi:         [ Links ]

8. Moran MC, Steketee, C, Forman D, Dunston R. Using a research-informed curriculum framework to guide reflection and future planning. Journal of Research in Interprofessional Practice and Education. 2015; 5(1) doi:         [ Links ]

9. Thistlethwaite JE, Moran M. Learning outcomes for interprofessional education (IPE): Literature review and synthesis. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2010; 24(5): 503-5133. doi:        [ Links ]

10. Ryan GS, Cuthbert K, Dryden T, Baker D, Forman D. Going 4D: Embedding the Four Dimensional Framework for Curriculum Design. In: Forman, Dawn; Jones, Marion and Thistlethwaite, Joan eds. Leading Research and Evaluation in Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice. 2016; London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 99-121. Doi:         [ Links ]

11. Health Professionals Council of South Africa. Core competencies for undergraduate students in clinical associates, dentistry and medical teaching and learning programmes in South Africa. Medical and Dentistry Board. 2014; Accessed 10 July 2019.         [ Links ]

12. The Joanna Briggs Institute. The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual 2017 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. 2017; Retrieved from         [ Links ]

13. *Levett-Jones T, Burdett T, Chow YL, Jonsson L, Lasater K, Mathews LR, McAllister M, Pooler A, Tee S, Wihlborg J. Case Studies of Interprofessional Education Initiatives From Five Countries. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 2018 May;50(3):324-332. doi:         [ Links ]

14. *Muller J, Snyman S, Slogrove A, Couper I. The value of interprofessional education in identifying unaddressed primary health-care challenges in a community: a case study from South Africa. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2019 Jul-Aug;33(4):347-355. doi:        [ Links ]

15. *Kickett M, Hoffman J, Flavell H. A model for large-scale, interprofessional, compulsory cross-cultural education with an indigenous focus. Journal of Allied Health. 2014 Spring;43 (1):38-44. PMID: 24598898.         [ Links ]

16. *Walker L, Cross M, Barnett T. Mapping the interprofessional education landscape for students on rural clinical placements: an integrative literature review. Rural and Remote Health 2018; 18: 4336. Doi:        [ Links ]

17. *Skolka M, Hennrikus WL, Khalid M, Hennrikus EF. Attitude adjustments after global health inter-professional student team experiences. Medicine. 2020; 99 (16): e19633. doi:         [ Links ]

18. *Steketee, C., Forman, D., Dunston, R., Yassine, T., Matthews, L. R., Saunders, R., Nicol, P., & Alliex, S. (2014). Interprofessional health education in Australia: Three research projects informing curriculum renewal and development. Applied Nursing Research, 27(2), 115-120. doi:         [ Links ]

19. *Alinier G, Harwood C, Harwood P, Montague S, Huish E, Ruparelia K, et al+. Immersive Clinical Simulation in Undergraduate Health Care Interprofessional Education: Knowledge and Perceptions. Clinical Simulation Nursing, 2014.10 (4): e 205-e216. doi:         [ Links ]

20. *Matthews LR, Pockett RB, Nisbet G, Thistlethwaite JE, Dunston R, Lee A, White JF. Building capacity in Australian interprofessional health education: perspectives from key health and higher education stakeholders. Australian Health Review. 2011 May;35(2):136-40. doi:         [ Links ]

21. *Homeyer S, Hoffmann W, Hingst P, Oppermann RF, Dreier-Wolfgramm A. Effects of interprofessional education for medical and nursing students: enablers, barriers and expectations for optimizing future interprofessional collaboration - a qualitative study. BMC Nursing. 2018 Apr 10;17:13. doi:         [ Links ]

22. *Lockeman KS, Lanning SK, Dow AW, Zorek JA, Diaz Granados D, Ivey CK. Et al. (2017). Outcomes of Introducing Early Learners to IPE competencies in Classroom Setting. Teach ing and Learning in Medicine. 2017; 29 (4); 433-443. doi:         [ Links ]

23. *Junod Perron N, Cerutti B, Picchiottino P, Empeyta S, Cinter F, van Gessel E. Needs assessment for training in interprofessional skills in Swiss primary care: a Delphi study. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2014; 28 (3): 273-275. doi:         [ Links ]

24. *Jorm C, Nisbet G, Roberts C, Gordon C, Gentilcore S, Chen TF. Using complexity theory to develop a student-directed interprofessional learning activity for 1220 healthcare students. BMC Medical Education. 2016 Aug 8;16:199. doi:         [ Links ]

25. *Tartavoulle M, English R, Gunaldo TP, Garbee D, Mercante DE, Andrieu SC, et al. Using the IDEA framework in an interprofessional didactic elective course to facilitate positive changes in the roles and responsibility competency. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2016; 2: 21-24. doi:         [ Links ]

26. *Wilbur, K., Kelly, I. Interprofessional impressions among nursing and pharmacy students: a qualitative study to inform interprofessional education initiatives. BMC Medical Education 15, 53 (2015).         [ Links ]

27. *Imafuku R, Kataoka R, Ogura H, Suzuki H, Enokida M, Osakabe K. What did first-year students experience during their interprofessional education? A qualitative analysis of e-portfolios. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2018 32 (3): 358-366. doi:         [ Links ]

28. *Engel J, Prentice D, Taplay K. A Power Experience: A Phenomenological Study of Interprofessional Education. Journal of Professional Nursing. 2017 May-Jun;33(3):204-211. doi:         [ Links ]

29. *Michalec B, Giordano C, Pugh B, Arenson C, Speakman E. Health Professions Students' Perceptions of Their IPE Program: Potential Barriers to Student Engagement with IPE Goals. Journal of Allied Health. 2017 Spring;46(1):10-20. PMID: 28255592.         [ Links ]

30. *Hallam KT, Livesay K, Morda R, Sharples J, Jones A, de Courten M. Do commencing nursing and paramedicine students differ in interprofessional learning and practice attitudes: evaluating course, socio-demographics and individual personality effects. BMC Medical Education, 2016; 16: 80-89. doi:         [ Links ]

31. *Pardue KT. Not left to chance: introducing an undergraduate interprofessional education curriculum. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2013 Jan;27(1):98-100. doi:         [ Links ]

32. *Croker, A., Wakely, L., & Leys, J. Educators working together for interprofessional education: From "fragmented beginnings" to "being intentionally interprofessional". Journal of Interprofessional Care, 2016. 30 (5), 671-674. Doi:         [ Links ]

33. *Fook J, D'Avray L, Norrie C, Psoinos M, Lamb B, Ross F. Taking the long view: exploring the development of interprofessional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2013 27:286-291.         [ Links ]

34. *Botma Y. Consensus on interprofessional facilitator capabilities. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2019; 33 (3)277-279. doi:         [ Links ]

35. *Berger S, Goetz K, Leowardi-Bauer C, Schultz JH, Szecsenyi J, Mahler C. Anchoring interprofessional education in undergraduate curricula: The Heidelberg story. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2017 Mar;31(2):175-179. Doi:https://10.1080/13561820.2016.1240156        [ Links ]

36. *Lairamore C, Morris D, Schichtl R, George-Paschal L, Martens H, Maragakis A, Garnica M, Jones B, Grantham M, Bruenger A. Impact of team composition on student perceptions of interprofessional teamwork: A 6-year cohort study. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2018 Mar;32(2):143-150. doi:         [ Links ]

37. *Reitsma G, Scrooby B, Rabie T, Viljoen M, Smit K, Du Preez A, Pretorius R, Van Oort A, Swanepoel M, Naude A, Dolman R. Health students' experiences of the process of interprofessional education: a pilot project. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2019 May-Jun;33(3):298-307. doi:         [ Links ]

38. *Kururi N, Tozato F, Lee B, Kazama H, Katsuyama S, Takahashi M, Abe Y, Matsui H, Tokita Y, Saitoh T, Kanaizumi S, Makino T, Shinozaki H, Yamaji T, Watanabe H. Professional identity acquisition process model in interprofessional education using structural equation modelling: 10-year initiative survey. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2016;30(2):175-83. doi:        [ Links ]

39. *Jernigan SD, Hodgkins SR, Hildenbrand WC, Laverentz DM, Johnson K, Waxman MJ, et al. Teaching for Practice: The Impact of a Large-Scale Interprofessional Foun-dational Program. Journal of Allied Health. 2018 47 (2) e53-e59.         [ Links ]

40. *Hean S, Craddock D, Hammick M, Hammick M. Theoretical insights into interprofessional education AMEE Guide no 62 Medical Teacher. 2012; 34: e78-e101. doi:         [ Links ]

41. *Craddock D, O'Halloran C, McPherson K, Hean S, Hammick M. A top-down approach impedes the use of theory? Interprofessional educational leaders' approaches to curriculum development and the use of learning theory. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2013 Jan;27(1):65-72. doi:         [ Links ]

42. *Fitzsimmons A, Cisneros B, Samore J. A learner developed longitudinal interprofessional education curriculum. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2014 Jan;28(1):66-7. doi:         [ Links ]

43. *Cerbin-Koczorowska M, Zielinska-Tomczak L, Waszyk-Nowaczy M, Michalak M, Skowron A. As the twig is bent, so is the tree inclined: a survey of student attitudes toward interprofessional collaboration supported with the curricula analysis. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2019; 33 (6): 636-644. doi:         [ Links ]

44. *O'Hara C, Trotter L, Olsen C, Stinson D, McCutcheon K. Development of an e-learning programme to improve knowledge of interprofessional education. British Journal of Nursing. 2018 Nov 22;27(21):1242-1245. doi:         [ Links ]

45. *Rosenfield D, Oandasan I, Reeves S. Perceptions versus reality: a qualitative study of students' expectations and experiences of interprofessional education. Medical Education. 2011 May;45(5):471-7. doi:         [ Links ]

46. *Karuguti WM, Phillips J, Barr H. Analysing the cognitive rigor of interprofessional curriculum using the Depth of Knowledge framework. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2017 Jul;31(4):529-532. doi:         [ Links ]

47. *Prast J, Herlache-Pretzer E, Frederick A, Gafni-Lachter L. Practical Strategies for Integrating Interprofessional Education and Collaboration into the Curriculum. Occupational Therapy Health Care. 2016;30(2):166-74. doi:         [ Links ]

48. *Chicorelli J, Dennie A, Heinrich C, Hinchey B, Honarparvar F, Jennings M, Keefe C, Metro TL, Peel C, Snowdon C, Tempelman J, Wong ME, Forbes SL, Livingston LA. Canadian student leaders' perspective on interprofessional education: A consensus statement. Journal of I nterprofessional Care. 2016 Jul;30(4):545-7. doi:         [ Links ]

49. *Olson RE, Klupp N, Astell-Burt T. Reimagining health professional socialisation: an interactionist study of interprofessional education. Health Sociology Review. 2016; 25(1): 92-107. doi:         [ Links ]

50. *De Vries-Erich J, Reuchlin K, de Maaijer P, Monica van de Ridder JM. Identifying facilitators and barriers for implementation of interprofessional education: Perspectives from medical educators in the Netherlands. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2017; 31: 2,170-174, doi:         [ Links ]

51. *Paslawski T, Kahlke R, Hatch T, Hall M, McFarlane L, Norton B, et al. Action, Reflection, and Evolution: A Pilot Implementation of Interprofessional Education across Three Rehabilitation Disciplines. Journal of Research in Interprofessional Practice and Education. 2014; 4(2): 1-10. doi:        [ Links ]

52. *Lehrer MD, Murray S, Benzar R, Stormont R., Lightfoot M, Hafertepe M, et al. A. Peer-led problem-based learning in interprofessional education of health professions students. Medical Education online. 2015 20:1, 28851, doi: v20.28851.         [ Links ]

53. *Rotz ME, Dueñas G G, Grover AB, Headly A, Parvanta CF. Exploring first-year pharmacy and medical students' experiences during a longitudinal interprofessional education program. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning. 2015; 7(3): 302-311. doi:         [ Links ]

54. *West C, Graham L, Palmer RT, Miller MF, Thayer EK, Stuber ML, Awdishu L, Umoren RA, Wamsley MA, Nelson EA, Joo PA, Tysinger JW, George P, Carney PA. Implementation of interprofessional education (IPE) in 16 U.S. medical schools: Common practices, barriers and facilitators. Journal of Interprofessional Education and Practice. 2016 Sep;4:41-49. doi:         [ Links ]

55. Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAF) Reconceptualising Health Professions Education in South Africa. 2018; doi:        [ Links ]

56. Sunguya BF, Hinthong W, Jimba M, Yasuoka J. Interprofessional education for whom? --challenges and lessons learned from its implementation in developed countries and their application to developing countries: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014 May 8;9(5):e96724. doi:         [ Links ]

57. Bachynsky N. Implications for policy: The Triple Aim, Quadruple Aim, and interprofessional collaboration. Nurs Forum. 2020 Jan;55(1):54-64. doi:10.1111/nuf.12382. Epub 2019 Aug 20. PMID: 31432533.         [ Links ]

58. Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, Fineberg H, Garcia P, Ke Y, Kelley P, Kistnasamy B, Meleis A, Naylor D, Pablos-Mendez A, Reddy S, Scrimshaw S, Sepulveda J, Serwadda D, Zurayk H. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 2010 Dec 4;376(9756):1923-58. doi:        [ Links ]

58. South African National Health Insurance Bill Government Gazette No. 42598, of 26 July 2019.         [ Links ]

59. *Stanley K, Stanley D. The HEIPS framework: Scaffolding interprofessional education starts with health professional educators. Nurse Education and Practice. 2019 Jan;34:63-71. doi:         [ Links ]

60. *Gilligan C, Outram S, Levett-Jones T. Recommendations from recent graduates in medicine, nursing and pharmacy on improving interprofessional education in university programs: a qualitative study. BMC Medical Education. 2014 Mar 18;14:52. doi:         [ Links ]

61. *Mellor R, Cottrell N, Moran M. "Just working in a team was a great experience..." - Student perspectives on the learning experiences of an interprofessional education program. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2013 Jul;27(4):292-7. doi:         [ Links ]



* Corresponding Author: Hanlie Pitout. Email:



Addendum A - Click to enlarge

Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License