IPEC Competency Self-Assessment Tool

National Center for Interprofessional Practice and Education's picture
Submitted by National Center... on Sep 6, 2016 - 11:12am CDT

Instrument
Authors: 
Dow, A.W.
DiazGranados, D.
Mazmanian, P. E.
Retchin, S. M.
Overview: 

This instrument was designed to assess competencies related to collaborative practice at the healthcare degree program level through individual student self-assessment. Specifically, the tool measures students' self-efficacy on items based on the 42 core competency statements developed by the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC, 2011), a consortium of professional associations in the U.S. representing six disciplines.  Results can help inform curriculum planning, track the effects of degree programs on interprofessional competency, and provide data that can be used within and between institutions to compare programmatic outcomes. The original validity study with a sample of 481 students at a single institution demonstrated good factor structure and internal consistency. Subsequent research (a multi-year study with a multi-institutional sample) led to a revised, shorter instrument whose items clustered around two strong factors.

Link to Resources
Descriptive Elements
Who is Being Assessed or Evaluated?: 
Individuals
Instrument Type: 
Self-report (e.g., survey, questionnaire, self-rating)
Source of Data: 
Health care trainees
Notes for Data Sources: 

The original study included 481 students enrolled in clinical degree programs for the 2012 academic year on the health science campus at a major urban institution.  Subsequent studies included samples from three additional institutions.

Instrument Content: 
Attitudes, values, beliefs regarding IPE, IPCP, professions
Behaviors / skills
Notes for Content: 

The original tool measured four domains (to reflect the IPEC core competency domains), with each domain containing 8-11 specific competencies: 

  1. Values and Ethics
  2. Roles and Responsibilities
  3. Interprofessional Communication
  4. Teams and Teamwork 

The revised tool measures two domains, with 8 items each:

  1. Interprofessional Interactions
  2. Interprofessional Values 
Instrument Length: 

Original tool: 42 items; revised tool, 16 items.  Time requirements are not specified.

Item Format: 
Each item uses a 5-point agreement scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
Administration: 
Students were emailed a link to an online version of the instrument.
Scoring: 
Mean and median scores were calculated for each domain.
Language: 
English
Norms: 
None described.
Access: 
Open access (available on this website)
Notes on Access: 

Contact Kelly Lockeman (kelly.lockeman@vcuhealth.org) to confirm permission to use.

Psychometric Elements: Evidence of Validity
Content: 
The items are based on the 42 core competency statements developed by the Interprofessional Education Collaborative's expert panel (2011). This Collaborative convened representatives from six national professional associations: the American Association of Colleges of Nursing, the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, the Association of Schools of Public Health, the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, the American Dental Education Association, and the Association of American Medical Colleges.
Response Process: 
Overall response rates were low, with 481 of 3236 students responding (14.9%) for the original study. Response rates in subsequent samples ranged from 9% to 19%.
Internal Structure: 
In the original study, factor analysis accounted for 79% of the variance in the response data in four factors. Component alphas for the four factors ranged from 0.96 to 0.98. In the refinement studies, exploratory factor analysis with another sample showed alphas for two strong factors consistently in the same range. Confirmatory factor analysis with a third sample yielded a normed Chi-square (X2/df) value of 2.85, which is within the acceptable range for model fit with high alpha values for each factor (0.92 for Factor 1 and 0.96 for Factor 2).
Relation to Other Variables: 
Scores on the four domains in the original study did not significantly differ across years of education or discipline (i.e., medicine, nursing, and pharmacy). However, the median score for roles and responsibilities was significantly different for nurses compared to other disciplines.
Consequential: 
None described.
9