Economic models for sustainable interprofessional education. Issue 6 (2nd November 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Carney, Patricia A.; Bearden, David T.; Osborne, Molly L.; Driessnack, Martha; Stilp, Curt C.; Gedney Baggs, Judith; Austin, Jared P.; Tonning, Kristi; Boyd, Jennifer
• Is Part Of: Journal of interprofessional care. Volume 32:Issue 6(2018)
• Page Start: 745
• Page End: 751
• Publication Date: 2018-11-02
• Subjects: Economic frameworks -- health professions tuition -- interprofessional education -- sustainability; Holistic medicine -- Periodicals; Interprofessional relations -- Periodicals; Health care teams -- Periodicals; 361
• DOI: 10.1080/13561820.2018.1509846
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1356-1820

Abstract

ABSTRACT: 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.