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

Abstract

Interprofessional identity (IPI) development is considered essential in reducing incongruency and improving interprofessional collaboration. However, noticeable differences in conceptualizations are being put forward in the literature, hindering interpretation of research findings and translation into practice. Therefore, a Concept Analysis and Critical Interpretative Synthesis of empirical research articles were conducted to explore the assumptions and conceptions of IPI. Independent literature screening by two researchers led to the inclusion and extraction of 39 out of 1334 articles. Through critical analysis, higher order themes were constructed and translated to a synthesizing argument and a conceptual framework depicting what constitutes IPI (attributes), the boundary conditions (antecedents) and the outcomes (consequences) of its development. The attributes refer to both IPI’s structural properties and the core beliefs indicative of an interprofessional orientation. The antecedents inform us on the importance of IPI-fitting constructivist learning environments and intergroup leadership in enabling its development. This development may lead to several consequences with regard to professional wellbeing, team effectiveness and the quintuple aim. Given the educational orientation of this study, ways for facilitating and assessing the development of IPI among learners across the professional continuum have been proposed, although empirical research is needed to further validate links and mediating and moderating variables.

Interprofessional identity and motivation towards interprofessional collaboration

“…EPIT is not the only theoretical approach to interprofessional identity [62][63][64] and propositions of any scientific theory should be falsifiable. 65 EPIT only remains a possible representation of reality until proven wrong.…”

Nursing Home Geriatric Rehabilitation Care and Interprofessional Collaboration; a practice- based study

“…In this context, an "interprofessional identity (IPI)" is a social identity with an "identity theme" that relates to IPC and to a group larger than an individual's own profession [13]. An IPI can be regarded as identi cation with an interprofessional team role that consists of a sense of membership, an emotional relationship with the identity group, and an orientation towards IPC [14]. IPI can therefore be divided into the following domains: Interprofessional belonging, interprofessional commitment, and interprofessional beliefs [13].…”

Placing Identity at the Center of Assessing Interprofessional Learning: Development of the Rubric InterProfessional Identity Development (RIPID)

“…Yet, the organization of health professions education into academic silos has resulted in learners developing a distinct professional identity characterized by a profession-centric mindset that acts as a barrier for collaboration (Baker et al, 2011;Pecukonis, 2014). For this reason, interprofessional education (IPE) should be organized so that learners develop positive beliefs toward collaboration and become equipped with the competencies needed to act upon these beliefs through interprofessional learning (IPL) (G. Cantaert et al, 2022;Bhattacharya et al, 2021). This way, the development of an interprofessional identity (IPI) can be supported, inferring that "a professional's meaning-making of collaborative practice develops from a profession-centric to a broader interprofessional orientation, in which one gains an awareness of their values and beliefs, acquires a greater openness toward collaboration, and feels increasingly con dent in acting accordingly as a committed member of an interprofessional community" (G. Cantaert et al, 2022, p. 21).…”

“…Cantaert et al (2022) posit that IPI development can be supported by leveraging the learning principles of Jonassen (1999) to engage adult learners in active, constructive, intentional, complex, authentic, collaborative, conversational and re ective learning activities through the design of constructivist learning environments (CLEs) (Brandt, 2018). This way, a holistic and learner-centered approach can be employed in which learners gradually adopt a collaborative mindset and become intrinsically motivated to act congruently with their identity (G. Cantaert et al, 2022;Oyserman, 2009). Central in designing CLEs is the focus on formative assessment of the (meta)cognitive, emotional and social dimensions of IPI development (G. Cantaert et al, 2022; Barnes et al, 2022;Gasaymeh, 2011).…”

“…This way, a holistic and learner-centered approach can be employed in which learners gradually adopt a collaborative mindset and become intrinsically motivated to act congruently with their identity (G. Cantaert et al, 2022;Oyserman, 2009). Central in designing CLEs is the focus on formative assessment of the (meta)cognitive, emotional and social dimensions of IPI development (G. Cantaert et al, 2022; Barnes et al, 2022;Gasaymeh, 2011). In this sense, assessment empowers learners to become responsible, re ective and self-regulated (inter)professionals (Panadero et al, 2018;Pereira et al, 2016a;Pereira et al, 2016b).…”