Students’ and Instructors’ Perspectives on Learning and Professional Development in the Context of Interprofessional Simulation

Figures & data

Table 1. Description of study participants.

Characteristic	Students		Facilitators
	Educational discipline		Profession
	Medical n = 51	Nursing n = 39	Physician n = 5	Nurse n = 8
Age in years^a
Median	26	26
Minimum	23	23
Maximum	51	46
Gender as n(%)
Male	21(41)	8 (20.5)	2 (40)	0
Female	30 (59)	31(79.5)	3 (60)	8 (100)
Clinical experience in years^b
Median			8	26.5
Minimum			2.5	9
Maximum			20	35
Facilitator experience in years^b
Median			3	5.5
Minimum			1.5	2
Maximum			10	13

^a Only for students.

^b Only for facilitators.

Table 2. Overview of themes, subthemes, and categories.

Themes	Subthemes	Categories
Students
Reflection on performance	Reflection in relation to self	Planning and structure
		Self-confidence
		Stress-tolerance
		Attention
	Reflection in relation to team members	Communication
		Group work
		leadership
	Reflection in relation to the environment	Awareness of surroundings
		Using all resources
Reflection on consequences of actions	Patient
	Working atmosphere	Structural
		Affective
Reflection on future professional growth	Further knowledge and training	Cognitive
		Practical
	Potential support and hindrances	Self Others
Facilitators
Group dynamics	Differences in competences & performance	Strengths
		Weaknesses
	The leadership issue	Students Facilitators
Student conceptualization of professional self	Reflection on performance
	Reflection on future development

Table 3. Key intergroup differences in students’ conceptualizations of their performance.

Performance as n (%)^a	Medical students n = 51	Nursing students n = 39	Total n = 90
Planning and structure
Strength	19 (37)	7 (18)	26 (29)
Weakness	9 (18)	16 (41)	25 (28)
Ambiguous	10 (20)	1 (3)	11 (12)
Self-confidence
Strength	4 (8)	9 (23)	13 (14)
Weakness	3 (6)	9 (23)	12 (13)
Daring to do something	12 (24)	11 (28)	23 (26)
Stress tolerance
Strength	3 (6)	9 (23)	12 (13)
Weakness	2 (4)	6 (15)	8 (9)
Directing attention wisely
Strength	2 (4)	5 (13)	7 (8)
Weakness	7 (14)	4 (10)	11 (12)
Communication skills
Strength	19 (37)	27 (69)	46 (51)
Weakness	8 (16)	3 (8)	11 (12)
Co-workership^b
Strength	18 (35)	12 (31)	30 (33)
Weakness	4 (8)	0	4 (4)
Being responsive	1 (2)	7 (18)	8 (9)
Leadership
Strength	28 (55)	2 (5)	30 (33)
Weakness	7 (14)	3 (8)	10 (11)

^a All percentages approximated to the nearest integer.

^b In Swedish “medarbetarskap” and refers to engaging in team work in a in a cooperative, productive and responsible manner.