Interprofessional Education for Medical, Nursing, Physical Therapy, and Military Health Students: Improving Future Collaboration | ||
| Journal of Medical and Life Science | ||
| Articles in Press, Corrected Proof, Available Online from 12 October 2025 | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/jmals.2025.458565 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Mayyadh Abdullah Alshelli* 1; Hind Mohammed Aljohani2; Maryam Ali AlJaber3; Norah Ahmed Almadhi4; Mohammed Abdulrahman Almutairi5; Abdullah Abdulaziz Rasheed Alrasheed6 | ||
| 1Military nurse, King Fahd Armed Forces Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia | ||
| 2Nursing, King Fahad Armed Hospital - Jeddah, Saudi Arabia | ||
| 3Nursing, Armed Forces Hospital, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia | ||
| 4Nursing, Armed forces hospital -dhahran, Saudi Arabia | ||
| 5Dental hygienist, Security Forces Hospitals Program, General Directorate of Medical Services, Ministry of Interior, Saudi Arabia | ||
| 6Anaesthesia technologist, Prince Sultan Hospital airbase, Saudi Arabia | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Background: Complexity of modern healthcare with chronic disease, aging populations, and unique challenges in military settings necessitates effective interprofessional collaboration. Interprofessional Education (IPE) ensures that medical, nursing, physical therapy (PT), and military healthcare students learn to practice collaboratively, eradicating the early silos that had resulted in fragmented care. Although IPE has been added to accreditation requirements, gaps in long-term outcomes persist. Aim: This review synthesizes evidence on IPE among medical, nursing, PT, and military healthcare students, taking into account its historical development, competencies, curriculum planning, barriers, facilitators, and outcomes to ensure maximum collaboration in the future. Methods: A peer-reviewed scoping review of sources (2010–2025) on PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus using keywords like "interprofessional education," "collaboration," and "military healthcare" was conducted. Thematic analysis identified the most striking patterns; two tables combined interventions and competencies. Results: IPE improves attitudes (Hedges' g = 0.45), role knowledge (effect size = 1.37, 95% CI [0.92, 1.82]), and communication (75% improvement). Behaviour changes reduce errors, with 20% better team performance; patient outcomes have fewer readmissions but are not well-evidenced. Conclusion: IPE is essential to collaborative practice, requiring ongoing facilitators like simulations and administration to cross boundaries. Longitudinal curricula and assessments are essential to fair, patient-based care in civilian and military environments. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Interprofessional Education; Collaborative Practice; Medical Education; Nursing Education; Physical Therapy Education; Military Healthcare Education | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 3 |
||
