Development of an interprofessional competency framework in Japan

Haruta, Junji; Sakai, Ikuko; Otsuka, Mariko; Yoshimoto, Hisashi; Yoshida, Kazue; Goto, Michiko; Shimoi, Toshinori

doi:10.1080/13561820.2016.1192588

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In April 2016, we developed the "Interprofessional competency framework in Japan" (Haruta et al, 2016) to define the skills necessary for collaboration among multiple professional academic associations. Thus, our future tasks include the development of reports and OSCE evaluation methods based on competency for collaboration.…”

Section: E Interest In Ipe Survey Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cross-sectional survey of interprofessional education across 13 healthcare professions in Japan

Goto¹,

Haruta²,

Oishi³

et al. 2018

TAPS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: With the rapid aging of the population, collaboration among the various medical professions throughout the country is becoming increasingly indispensable in Japan. To promote collaboration in medical care, it is necessary to introduce the c oncept of collaboration to students at an early stage of their professional education. Despite this need, there are no core medical, healthcare and welfare education curricula in Japan that include interprofessional education (IPE). Therefore, the status of IPE in Japanese schools of medicine and other healthcare-related services is unclear. Methods: We sent 3,430 questionnaires to 13 schools of medicine and related healthcare providers: doctors, nurses, physical therapists, registered dieticians, dentists, dental hygienists, social workers, pharmacists, occupational therapists, clinical psychologists, medical administrators, certified care workers, and speech therapists. The items addressed implementation rate of IPE, teaching methods and grading methods. Results: Of the 3,430 surveys distributed, 572 completed surveys were returned (response rate 17%). Of the completed surveys, 493 qualified as valid, resulting in a final response rate of 14%. Only 19% (n = 93) of the analysed medical educational institutions included IPE instruction in their curricula. Conclusion: While many educational institutions were conducting IPE, there were important inter-institutional differences with respect to attitudes towards IPE, teaching methods, and evaluation methods. This study was unprecedented in scale, and provides important basic information for the future development of IPE in Japan.

show abstract

Section: E Interest In Ipe Survey Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cross-sectional survey of interprofessional education across 13 healthcare professions in Japan

Goto¹,

Haruta²,

Oishi³

et al. 2018

TAPS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…IPE was introduced to Japan within this historical context towards the end of the 20th century as 'team medicine', to enhance clinical outcomes and to promote best practices for patient safety. 5 Aa a result of an aging society and other factors, the Japanese medical system is being challenged to shift resources from hospital-based to communitybased and home-care practices. Health care training organisations are currently incorporating major curricular transitions, including seamless IPE curricula from undergraduate to postgraduate interprofessional work.…”

Section: The Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inter-department or hospital clinic-based IPE is essential in the continuum of health care delivery. 5 The establishment of interprofessional learning outcomes and standards in national and clinical settings assumes critical importance as IPE proliferates. Evaluation methods require validation according to the health care system and the learning goals of IPE as implemented in different countries.…”

Section: The Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interprofessional education in Japan

Komasawa

Berg

Terasaki

et al. 2020

The Clinical Teacher

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Such consensus also reflects an interprofessional need and corresponding effort to identify the broad categories for competencies (Calhoun et al 2008;Hoge et al 2014;Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel 2011;IOM 2003a), so as to avoid the discipline-specific definition of competencies, which can create often insurmountable differences that may perpetuate the concerns addressed by the IOM in 2001 and 2003. The previous lack of consensus in behavioral training has led to a variety of problems, including increased challenges in state regulatory efforts.…”

Section: Historical Basis For Competenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correction to: An Interprofessional Framework for Telebehavioral Health Competencies

Maheu¹,

Drude

Hertlein

et al. 2019

J. technol. behav. sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Coalition for Technology in Behavioral Science (CTiBS) has developed an interprofessional, evidence-based, measurable framework for telebehavioral health (TBH) competencies. The paper presents the development of the CTiBS TBH framework, identifies the theoretical rationale and need for such competencies; outlines methods used; provides two detailed discussions of applications; presents a tabulized form of the framework, then discusses limitations and future research. In the CTiBS TBH competency framework, the term telebehavioral health is meant to include telemental health and e-therapy. The TBH competency framework is offered as an initial working document to identify and organize discreet, measurable telebehavioral practices derived from a review of the literature, technological advances and day-today clinical practice. It reflects core knowledge, skills and attitudes needed for competent telebehavioral health practice. The competency framework is directly applicable to psychiatry/medicine, psychology, social work, counseling, marriage/family, behavior analysis and other behavioral sciences. The CTiBS TBH framework organizes seven topic domains and five subdomains according to competency level i.e., Novice, Proficient or Authority. In turn, each competency level is categorized into 51 discrete telebehavioral objectives, which are then distinguished by 149 cumulative and measurable telebehavioral practices. The seven TBH competency domains identified by CTiBS include: 1) Clinical Evaluation & Care, with three subdomains addressing Assessment & Treatment, Cultural Competence & Diversity and Documentation & Administrative Procedures; 2) Virtual Environment & Telepresence; 3) Technology; 4) Legal & Regulatory Issues; 5) Evidence-Based & Ethical Practice, with two subdomains addressing Standards and Guidelines and Social Media; 6) Mobile Health and Apps and 7) Telepractice Development.

show abstract

Development of an interprofessional competency framework in Japan

Cited by 15 publications

References 3 publications

A cross-sectional survey of interprofessional education across 13 healthcare professions in Japan

A cross-sectional survey of interprofessional education across 13 healthcare professions in Japan

Interprofessional education in Japan

Correction to: An Interprofessional Framework for Telebehavioral Health Competencies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About