2022 Nexus Innovation Challenge
Who Should Participate?
Those who are committed to better patient care and health outcomes through interprofessional learning will want to participate in the Nexus Innovation Challenge. Because of the nature of the Challenge and its focus on back-home solutions, interprofessional teams will benefit most from participating in this longitudinal experience. Teams can include up to eight members from one or more institutions working together on an identified challenge. The Innovation Challenge is a long-term investment in the work you and your team are already doing in your own context.
Who should participate?
- Organizational IPE leaders/ teams interested in developing "next level" IPE in the clinical learning environment
- Graduate medical education program leaders and interprofessional partners developing cross-cutting curriculum in practice-based learning and improvement, interpersonal and communications skills, or systems-based practice
- Interprofessional practice teams working towards patient-centered practice transformation
- Transitioning a team-based simulation into community clinical settings
- Designing an interprofessional community-based curriculum with community and clinical partners to result in clinical outcomes
Read what some of our 2021 Innovation Challenge participants had to say about how the Challenge impacted their work:
- "The Design Thinking process was great because it allowed each member of our team to be explicit about what solutions they were bringing to the table so we could create a shared mental model."
- "We learned to trust each other and to have grace with each other."
- "The feedback from our [coaches] and the judges was invaluable, it is extremely beneficial to get perspectives from others who are not directly involved with the project and have expertise in project implementation and planning."
- "Our initial idea was much too large, and this process allowed us to rein it in to something more manageable, ultimately allowing us to see the advantage of taking smaller steps until we reached our ultimate goal."
- "The Design Thinking process helped us identify our stakeholders, anticipate challenges we might face, and develop solutions for those challenges."
2019 Case Examples
In the 2019 Innovation Challenge, teams tackled a range of challenges and developed several unique prototypes. Here are a few examples:
- The University of Pittsburgh and UPMC team chose to focus on strategies to scale up interprofessional learning opportunities in UPMC’s clinical learning environments so as to engage increased numbers of learners across the learning continuum. Their prototype was a new version of the Patient-Family Care Center (PFCC), but with students added. This was intended to be a model that could then be “scaled up” to other clinical units that were similar. The team journey-mapped how the student would engage within the current PFCC ortho clinic in Magee Women’s Hospital. The group identified IPEC core competencies to be measured at each touchpoint along the student’s engagement path with patient.
- A team comprised of individuals from Oregon Health Sciences University, Medical College of Wisconsin, Christian Brothers University focused on the hidden curriculum that students experience in the clinical learning environment both uniprofessionally and interprofessionally. Create a universal facilitator’s guide detailing how to use online learning platforms to address the following student prompt: "Write about an interprofessional interaction that impacted the patient and/or family.” The online learning platform would have two faculty/preceptor monitored discussion boards—one featuring positive interactions and one featuring negative interactions. Students would be required to post their online response to the prompt and respond to another student’s post for both positive and negative experiences.
- The team from Sam Houston State University focused on improving cultural competence in students entering health professions. Their prototype became a course or activity that tests students’ ability to engage patients through a panic room escape structure. They would utilize standardized patients and questioning to unlock clues, eventually escaping from the room. Their pitch focused on creating clinical training around cultural competency that was fresh and in the "language" of the student with an emphasis on active learning.