Advancing the Level of Measurement of IPE from Self –Report to Assessment of Behavior Through Sociograms

Leah Lowe PhD, DPT, PCS

Lorrie George-Paschal PhD, OTR/L, ATP

Duston Morris PhD, MS, CTRS, ACE-CPT, CHES

Chad Lairamore PhD, PT, NCS, GCS

Learning Objectives • Understand how a sociogram advances the level of

measurement of IPEC core competencies in a pilot study • Engage in the use of a sociogram to measure interactions

during a small group experience • Reflect and share ways to utilize data generated through

a sociogram to improve the quality of student interaction during IPE experiences

Preaching to the Choir • Interprofessional

Education (IPE) experiences assist healthcare profession students in developing the collaborative skills required for today’s complex healthcare environment

(Abu-Rish et al.2012)

Background

The Team • T3 IPE Experience- led

the presenters to explore the use of sociograms

What is a sociogram?

Drahota & Dewey 2008

Historical Use • Long time use in educational contexts (Brickell 1950)

• Information systems research (Willis & Coakes 2000)

• Research in psychiatric settings (Taiminen 1998)

• Gaining popularity in nursing (Happell 2007)

• Focus group analysis (Drahota 2008) (Bairadi 2015)

Benefits of Sociograms • Provides advanced measures from self-report to observation • Identifies and describes actual interpersonal interactions • Gives insight into hidden structures that give form to a group-

leading to patient centered care (Meltzer et al. 2010) • Recognizes dynamics, alliances, rejections (Drahota & Dewey,

2008)

Sociograms • Graphic notations

reflect: – Mutual interactions – Power shifts – Rejections – Imperatives v. questions – Level of group

participation Careau et al. 2008

Health Care Team Challenge- Washington State University Health Sciences (WSUHS) Bray, B, Woodard, L., & Richardson, B. (2015). Health care team challenge. Collaborating Across Borders Conference (CAB V). Roanoke, VA • The clinical case-based competition designed to promote

knowledge of roles and collaboration

Two IP groups of students given a case scenario in advance Each IP group created an interview guide Interviewed the client/ family member Collaborated to develop a proposed plan of care Shared highlights of the plan to the family Faculty observers rated the groups using the WSUHS Team Challenge Rating

Sheet

UCA HCTC Modification- Pilot Sociogram 3 Groups – 1 Faculty Group (4/4) and 2 Student Groups (4/11) 1 Client • Interviews took place in the College of Health Sciences Nabholz Center

for Health Care Simulation Group meeting after receiving / reading the case scenario/ develop

questions Client Interview Group meeting to discuss suggestions Report the group’s summary of suggestions for the client

The Case • Mrs. H • 92 y/o • Post CVA • Lives with daughter

PT

OT

SLP

RN

JH

?

?

i

HOW CAN WE USE THIS DATA?

Patterns & Agreement

Summative Table

Sociogram Data – Client Interview

Sociogram – Post-Interview Discussion

Additional Measures

Interprofessional Collaboration Scale

Team Skills Scale

Conclusions • Sociograms advanced the level of measurement of

communication during a group interaction • Sociograms provide meaningful data to compare with

student perception ratings • Sociograms generate data that can be used effectively in

team debriefing

References • Abu-Rish E, Kim S, Choe L, et al. Current trends in interprofessional education of health sciences students: A

literature review. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2012; 26(6):444-451. • Careau E, Vincent C, Noreau L. Assessing interprofessional teamwork in a videoconference-based

telerehabilitation setting. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. 2008;14:427-434. • Brickell HM. What you can do with sociograms. English Journal. 1950;39(5):256-261. • Willis D, Coakes E. Enabling technology for collaborative working: a socio-technical experience. In Clarke S,

Lehaney B Human centered methods in information systems: current research and practice. Hershey, PA: Idea Group. 119-130.

• Taiminen TJ, Kallio-Soukainen K, Nokso-Koivisto H, et al. Contagion of deliberate self-harm among adolescent

inpatients. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 1998;37(2):211-217. • Happell B. Focus groups in nursing research: an appropriate method or the latest fad. Nurse Researcher.

2007;14(2):18-24.

References • Drahota A, Dewey A. The sociogram: a useful tool in the analysis of focus groups. Nursing Research.

2008;57(4): 293-297. • Baiardi JM, Gultekin L, Brush BL. Using sociograms to enhance power and voice in focus groups. Public Health

Nursing. 2015; 32(5):585-591. • Meltzer D, Chung J, Khalili P, et al. Exploring the use of social network methods in designing healthcare quality

improvement teams. Social Science Medicine. 2010;71(6):1119-11130 • Bray B, Woodard L, Richardson B. Health care team challenge. Collaborating Across Borders Conference (CAB

V). 2015; Roanoke, VA • Newton C, Bainbridge L, Ball V, et al. The health care team challenge: developing an international

interprofessional education research collaboration. Nursing Education Today. 2015;35(1):4-8.

• Hepburn K, Tsukuda RA, Fasser C. Team skills scale. In Heinemann GD, Zeiss AM Team performance in health care: assessment and development. 1996; New York: Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers.

References • Kenaszchuk C, Reeves S, Nocholas D, Zwarenstein M. Validity and reliability of a multiple-group measurement

for interprofessional collaboration. BMC Health Services Research. 2010;10: 83.