TY - JOUR
T1 - Economic models for sustainable interprofessional education
AU - Carney, Patricia A.
AU - Bearden, David T.
AU - Osborne, Molly
AU - Driessnack, Martha
AU - Stilp, Curt C.
AU - Gedney Baggs, Judith
AU - Austin, Jared P.
AU - Tonning, Kristi
AU - Boyd, Jennifer
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, © 2018 Taylor & Francis.
PY - 2018/11/2
Y1 - 2018/11/2
N2 - Limited information exists on funding models for interprofessional education (IPE) course delivery, even though potential savings from IPE could be gained in healthcare delivery efficiencies and patient safety. Unanticipated economic barriers to implementing an IPE curriculum across programs and schools in University settings can stymie or even end movement toward collaboration and sustainable culture change. Clarity among stakeholders, including institutional leadership, faculty, and students, is necessary to avoid confusion about IPE tuition costs and funds flow, given that IPE involves multiple schools and programs sharing space, time, faculty, and tuition dollars. In this paper, we consider three funding models for IPE: (a) Centralized (b) Blended, and (c) Decentralized. The strengths and challenges associated with each of these models are discussed. Beginning such a discussion will move us toward understanding the return on investment of IPE.
AB - Limited information exists on funding models for interprofessional education (IPE) course delivery, even though potential savings from IPE could be gained in healthcare delivery efficiencies and patient safety. Unanticipated economic barriers to implementing an IPE curriculum across programs and schools in University settings can stymie or even end movement toward collaboration and sustainable culture change. Clarity among stakeholders, including institutional leadership, faculty, and students, is necessary to avoid confusion about IPE tuition costs and funds flow, given that IPE involves multiple schools and programs sharing space, time, faculty, and tuition dollars. In this paper, we consider three funding models for IPE: (a) Centralized (b) Blended, and (c) Decentralized. The strengths and challenges associated with each of these models are discussed. Beginning such a discussion will move us toward understanding the return on investment of IPE.
KW - Economic frameworks
KW - health professions tuition
KW - interprofessional education
KW - sustainability
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052157406&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052157406&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13561820.2018.1509846
DO - 10.1080/13561820.2018.1509846
M3 - Article
C2 - 30110201
AN - SCOPUS:85052157406
SN - 1356-1820
VL - 32
SP - 745
EP - 751
JO - Journal of Interprofessional Care
JF - Journal of Interprofessional Care
IS - 6
ER -