Lindsay Iverson

Evaluation of a Chemotherapy and Medication Education Process for Patients Starting Cancer Treatment

A cancer diagnosis, along with accompanying chemotherapy treatments and new medication regimens, can significantly affect patients overall health, well-being, and quality of life. Chemotherapy and medication teaching that meets patients learning needs enhances knowledge and supports adherence to instructions. These interventions promote optimal patient outcomes, satisfaction, and overall safety.

Development and Assessment of an Interprofessional Education Simulation to Promote Collaborative Learning and Practice

BACKGROUNDnWe designed an interprofessional education (IPE) clinical simulation that paired nurse practitioner and pharmacy students. The objective was to evaluate the effect on attitudes of interprofessional collaborative learning and practice.nnnMETHODnPerceptions were assessed using the Student Perceptions of Interprofessional Clinical Education-Revised instrument and reflection questions that assessed the simulations effectiveness in requiring team knowledge and experience from each profession whether the experience improved individual student clinical performance, and how this team approach influenced patient outcomes.nnnRESULTSnStudents believed that working with another health profession was educationally beneficial and should be a required experience; they also believed that this collaboration improved patient outcomes and satisfaction. Responses also indicated student ambiguity about their role in interprofessional care, and that clinical rotations were not the ideal setting for first professional interactions with others.nnnCONCLUSIONnStudents expressed satisfaction and increased awareness of the importance of collaboration to ensure patient safety. Increasing interprofessional education experiences prior to clinical rotations should be considered. [J Nurs Educ. 2018;57(7):426-429.].

The development of an instrument to evaluate interprofessional student team competency

ABSTRACT Healthcare institutions, accreditation agencies for higher learning, and organizations such as the National Academy of Medicine in the United States, support interprofessional education (IPE) opportunities. However, incorporating IPE opportunities into academic settings remains difficult. One challenge is assessing IPE learning and practice outcomes, especially at the level of student performance to ensure graduates are “collaboration-ready”. The Creighton-Interprofessional Collaborative Evaluation (C-ICE) instrument was developed to address the need for a measurement tool for interprofessional student team performance. Four interprofessional competency domains provide the framework for the C-ICE instrument. Twenty-six items were identified as essential to include in the C-ICE instrument. This instrument was found to be both a reliable and a valid instrument to measure interprofessional interactions of student teams. Inter-rater reliability as measured by Krippendorff’s nominal alpha (nKALPHA) ranged from .558 to .887; with four of the five independent assessments achieving nKALPHA greater than or equal to 0.796. The findings indicated that the instrument is understandable (Gwet’s alpha coefficient (gAC) 0.63), comprehensive (gAC = 0.62), useful and applicable (gAC = 0.54) in a variety of educational settings. The C-ICE instrument provides educators a comprehensive evaluation tool for assessing student team behaviors, skills, and performance.

Examination of a Palliative Care Screening Tool in Intensive Care Unit Patients

No standardized screening tool for the assessment of a patient’s needs for palliative care in the intensive care unit (ICU) exists. This retrospective, descriptive, exploratory study examined the Center to Advance Palliative Care screening criteria, combined to create a tool, to identify patients with a high likelihood of unmet palliative care needs. The investigator reviewed medical records of 200 randomly selected patients admitted to an ICU and used the tool to determine the presence of criteria. The study found that 176 patients (88%) met at least 1 of the screening criteria; 35 of those (19.8%) were referred to palliative care. Of the 200 patients, 31 (15.5%) died in the ICU; 14 (45%) of those received palliative care services before death. The number of screening criteria met was significant in predicting the probability of dying in the ICU (P < .0001). Of the patients who met the most criteria, 16 of 26 (61.5%) utilized palliative care. Findings suggest there is a need for a screening tool to identify patients with a high likelihood of unmet palliative care needs. This tool is a predictor of mortality based on the number of criteria met. Early palliative care should be considered in all patients who meet 1 or more of the Center to Advance Palliative Care screening criteria.