Interprofessional and Collaborative Practices of Athletic Trainers in the Secondary School Setting

Abstract

Context Interprofessional and collaborative practice (IPCP) is thought to improve comprehensive patient care but is often hindered by a lack of knowledge about the scope of training of other providers, inadequate communication, and structural barriers. The secondary school setting may pose unique challenges to IPCP. Objective To investigate the perceptions and practices of secondary school athletic trainers (SSATs) regarding IPCP. Design and Setting Cross-sectional, Web-based survey. Patients or Other Participants Secondary school athletic trainers (N = 379, age = 35 ± 11 years, experience = 12 ± 10 years). Intervention(s) We used a modified version of the Clinician Perspectives of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice Survey, a validated survey consisting of 6 sections representing 6 different constructs (48 items) and 4 open-ended response questions focused on perceived challenges, resources, drawbacks, and benefits relative to IPCP. Main Outcomes Measure(s) We calculated descriptive statistics, including a composite mean, to characterize the scores on each construct. We analyzed the open-ended, qualitative data using general inductive coding and used multiple analysts and auditing to establish trustworthiness. Results We contacted 4666 SSATs to complete the survey. We had 507 (10.9%) SSATs respond, and 379 (74.8%) completed the survey in its entirety. Secondary school athletic trainers agreed with or marked that statements were either always true or sometimes true for all constructs. Three main themes emerged from the open-ended data: (1) communication, (2) infrastructure, and (3) learning. Communication was deemed critical, and having access to shared information improved collaboration. Secondary school athletic trainers were often responsible for initiating communication. A strong infrastructure that enhanced access to other providers, incorporated parents, and improved efficiency helped support IPCP. Interprofessional and collaborative practice resulted in learning between providers, including roles and responsibilities, which yielded stronger trust and respect. Interprofessional and collaborative practice resulted in idea sharing and potentially improved patient outcomes. Conclusions Although SSATs described regular use of IPCP in practice, barriers exist that diminish IPCP including communication, infrastructure, and learning between professions.

Secondary School State Athletic Association Health and Safety Policy Development Processes

“…As found in this project, SMACs were typically comprised of physicians, athletic trainers, and other health care professionals. This finding was reassuring since both are experts in secondary school athlete safety and consider inter‐professional collaborative practice important 31 . Athletic trainers have daily contact with their patients at high schools depending on their employment type, which provides unique insight to the policy development process 32 .…”

“…Including other health care professionals on committees involved in the policy development process was not consistent across SHSAAs. A SMAC without other types of sports medicine health care providers should consider adding at least 1 representative to generate a robust inter‐professional discernment to policies 31 . School nurses may be beneficial to include, as they also have potential daily contact with high school students and play important communication roles with athletes regarding concussions, asthma, anaphylaxis, and diabetes 34‐37 .…”

“…This finding was reassuring since both are experts in secondary school athlete safety and consider inter-professional collaborative practice important. 31 Athletic trainers have daily contact with their patients at high schools depending on their employment type, which provides unique insight to the policy development process. 32 They are also responsible for developing policies specific to their high schools and implementing both state and institutional policies.…”

“…A SMAC without other types of sports medicine health care providers should consider adding at least 1 representative to generate a robust inter-professional discernment to policies. 31 School nurses may be beneficial to include, as they also have potential daily contact with high school students and play important communication roles with athletes regarding concussions, asthma, anaphylaxis, and diabetes. [34][35][36][37] Inter-professional health care is important with the general population, and should be just as important for athlete health care too.…”

“…[34][35][36][37] Inter-professional health care is important with the general population, and should be just as important for athlete health care too. 31 In some instances, non-health care professionals (eg, coaches) were included on the SMAC. We postulate that a SMAC which is inclusive of representatives from both health care professions along with lay-persons may result in improved buy-in from the various individuals across the socioecological framework.…”