Interprofessional identity development within a brief shadowing experience: An exploratory case study

Interprofessional Identity in Health and Social Care: Analysis and Synthesis of the Assumptions and Conceptions in the Literature

“…In the case of the latter, near-peer tutoring may prove to be a powerful strategy, where tutors, who are quite similar in profile to the tutees but have progressed further in their training, can explain and model certain skills and behaviors for tutees to learn [ 120 , 121 ]. Conversely, simulations may be an appropriate steppingstone for more complex learning strategies such as situated learning, where learning occurs in the workplace, for instance through the work shadowing of professionals outside one’s field or through cross-professional mentorship [ 76 , 81 ]. More so, learners from different programs may take on primary responsibility in providing integral care in student-run units for a specific population such as at the orthopedics or emergency department, while being supervised and coached by multiple professional mentors [ 177 ].…”

“…The consequences related to the development of IPI are discernable at the levels of professional, team and health system. The most notable consequence at the individual level was professional wellbeing, in which professionals share a feeling of belonging and attachment, experience professional solidarity and fulfillment, are confident and motivated, and take pleasure in collaborating [ 76 , 83 , 87 , 103 ]. These outcomes fit well with those reported in the meta-analysis by Kaiser et al [ 190 ], who conclude that IPC is crucial in achieving a collective wellbeing across professions as it facilitates an efficient and meaningful distribution of work demands, helps to achieve organizational goals, and stimulates personal growth as well as professional development [ 190 , 191 ].…”

“…Articles were sorted by the concepts being described and same-author studies were grouped in the data-extraction table ( Table S5 ). The majority of included articles ( n = 25) explicitly mention IPI, most often in combination with the concept dual identity ( n = 11) [ 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 ], but also in combination with roles ( n = 4) such as: change agent [ 79 ], team player [ 80 , 81 ], boundary spanner [ 82 , 83 ] and interprofessional [ 84 ]. Furthermore, IPI was described as a flexible ( n = 1) [ 85 ], integrated ( n = 1) [ 86 ] or an extended ( n = 2) [ 87 , 88 ] professional identity.…”

“…Other relevant identified concepts were: collective identity ( n = 2) [ 95 , 96 , 97 ], superordinate identity ( n = 2) [ 98 , 99 ], health care professional identity ( n = 1) [ 100 ], group identity ( n = 1) [ 101 ], and collaborative identity ( n = 1) [ 82 , 102 ]. The most widely adopted theoretical perspective ( n = 25) was Social Identity Theory (SIT), which approaches IPI as a dual role and/or a flexible/integrated/extended professional identity [ 65 , 66 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 80 , 81 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 92 , 94 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 103 ]. A theoretical perspective on identity was absent in six articles [ 67 , 89 , 91 , 93 , 95 , 101 ], while other articles made reference to social learning theories, such as Communities of Practice ( n = 3) [ 82 , 96 , 97 , 102 ], Role Identity Theory ( n = 1) [ 80 , 81 ], Organizational Learning Theory ( n = 1, e.g., double-loop learning) […”

“…Refs. [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , ...…”