Health professions education in Serbia: evaluation and measures for quality improvement through experiential education, interprofessional education, and teaching competencies development

  • Milena Kovačević University of Belgrade, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmacokinetics and Clinical Pharmacy, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Marina Odalović University of Belgrade, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Social Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Legislation, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Danijela Djukić-Ćosić University of Belgrade, Department of Toxicology “Akademik Danilo Soldatović”, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Dragana Vasiljević University of Belgrade, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology and Cosmetology, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Jelena Parojčić University of Belgrade, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology and Cosmetology, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Ljiljana Tasić University of Belgrade, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Social Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Legislation, Belgrade, Serbia
Keywords: delivery of health care;, education;, health personnel;, professional competence;, serbia;, students;, surveys and questionnaires;, teaching.

Abstract


Background/Aim. Health professions education is facing emerging issues. A comprehensive situation analysis was performed among academic staff, healthcare practitioners, and healthcare science students to address and respond to new trends. The aim of the study was to investigate the attitude, perception, and the recognized needs towards experiential education (EE), interprofessional education (IPE), and teaching competencies development (TCD). The critical evaluation of the existing quality standards for further quality improvement in health professions education in Serbia was provided. Methods. The survey on EE, IPE, and TCD was conducted within the Reinforcement of the Framework for Experiential Education in Serbia (ReFEEHS) project, co-funded by the Erasmus+ program of the European Comission  at four Serbian universities (the University of Belgrade, the University of Kragujevac, the University of Niš, and the University of Novi Sad). Four task groups were appointed to perform a desk review of the existing curricula, recommendations, and practices within each of the four health professions education (Medicine, Pharmacy, Dentistry, and Nursing) in Serbia and assess the level of compliance with relevant educational policies and practices in the European Union . Results. A total of 1,507 respondents completed the survey. A highly expressed positive attitude was found towards EE, IPE, and TCD among all the respondents. The majority of the respondents (> 70%) shared that EE should be organized in real-life practice and involve students’ work under the supervision of a qualified supervisor, as well as interactions with patients and healthcare professionals. About 90% of the respondents supported the inclusion of IPE teaching activities into EE, with 77% of students expressing high motivation to attend those classes, whereas 93% of academic staff was eager to deliver and teach joint IPE subjects. Only 20% of academic staff has already attended some TCD program, while 75% recognized the need for its organization. Moreover, 90% of healthcare practitioners have recognized that mentors/clinical supervisors also need additional skills for effective mentoring work within health science education. Based on the survey results, recommendations for improvement were given within three educational fields, healthcare science curricula, professional practice (traineeship), teaching staff, and regulations. Conclusion. The results derived from the survey served as a starting but also a vital point for higher education improvement in Serbia. All interested parties – academia, students, healthcare professionals, and regulatory bodies should collaborate on achieving improved, contemporary, and transformative health professions education.

References

1.      Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2001 Available from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog
/>/10027 [cited 2020 September 9].

2.      World Health Organization (WHO). Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education & Collaborative Practice [Internet]. 2010 Available from: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/20
/>10/WHO_HRH_HPN_10.3_eng.pdf?ua=1 [cited 2020 February 11].

3.      Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet 2010; 376(9756): 1923–58.

4.      European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the recognition of professional qualifications [Internet]. 2005. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32005L0036

5.      European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Directive 2013/55/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the recognition of professional qualifications [Internet]. 2013. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32013L0055

6.      World Health Organization (WHO). Transforming and scaling up health professionals’ education and training [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2020 Feb 11]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/
/>bitstream/handle/10665/93635/9789241506502_eng.pdf?seq
uence=1

7.      World Federation for Medical Education (WFME). WFME Global Standards for Quality Improvement: Basic Medical Education [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://wfme.org/download/wfme-global-standards-for-quali
/>ty-improvement-bme/?wpdmdl=831&refresh=5f58c26b97bce
1599652459%22%3EDownload%3C/a%3E%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3C/div%3E%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3C/div%3E%20%20%20%20%3C/div%3E%3C/div%3E%3C/div%3E

8.      International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP). Quality Assurance of Pharmacy Education: the FIP Global Framework [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://www.fip.org/www/streamfile.php?filename=fip/PharmacyEduction/Quality_Assurance/QA_Framework_2nd_Edi
/>tion_online_version.pdf

9.      Commission on Dental Accreditation. Accreditation Standards For Dental Education Programs [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://www.ada.org/~/media/COD
/>A/Files/predoc_standards.pdf?la=en

10.   World Health Organization (WHO). Global standards for the initial education of professional nurses and midwives. [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://www.who.int/hrh/nursing_midwifery/hrh_global_standards_education.pdf

11.   van Zanten M, Boulet JR, Greaves I. The importance of medical education accreditation standards. Med Teach 2012; 34(2): 136–45.

12.   Sjöström H, Christensen L, Nystrup J, Karle H. Quality assurance of medical education: Lessons learned from use and analysis of the WFME global standards. Med Teach 2019; 41(6): 650–5.

13.   Blouin D, Tekian A. Accreditation of Medical Education Programs: Moving From Student Outcomes to Continuous Quality Improvement Measures. Acad Med 2018; 93(3): 377–83.

14.   European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA), European Students’ Union (ESU), European University Association (EUA), European Association of Institutions in Higher Education (EURASHE). Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) [Internet]. 2015. Available from: https://enqa.eu/wp-ontent/uploads/2015/11/ESG_2015.pdf>

15.   National Entity for Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (NEAQA). Regulations on Standards and Procedures for Accreditation of Higher Education Institutions [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://www.nat.rs/en/regulations/

16.   National Entity for Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (NEAQA). Regulations on Standards for Initial Accreditation of Higher Education Institutions and Study Programmes [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://www.nat.rs/en/regulations/

17.   National Entity for Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (NEAQA). Regulations on Standards and Procedure for Accreditation of Study Programmes [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://www.nat.rs/en/regulations/

18.   National Entity for Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (NEAQA). Rulebook on standards and procedure for external quality control of higher education institutions [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available  from: https://www.nat.rs/en/regulations/

19.   National Entity for Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (NEAQA). Regulation on standards for self-evaluation and quality assessment of higher education institutions and study program [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 May 7]. Available from: https://www.nat.rs/en/regulations/

20.   Harden RM, Crosby J. AMEE Guide No 20: The good teacher is more than a lecturer - the twelve roles of the teacher. Med Teach 2000; 22(4): 334–47.

21.   ReFEEHS Preparation Working Group. Health professions education in Serbia The Need for Change Report [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2022 Apr 04]. Available from: https://refeehs.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/ReFEEH
/>S-Project-Need-for-Change-Report-1.pdf 

22.   International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP). Strategic plan 2019-2024. [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Apr 28]. Available from: https://www.fip.org/file/4369

23.   Association for Experiential Education. What is Experiential Education? [Internet]. [cited 2020 Sep 3]. Available from: https://www.aee.org/what-is-ee

24.   Hill B. Research into experiential learning in nurse education. Br J Nurs 2017; 26(16): 932–8.

25.   Alvarez S, Schultz JH. A communication-focused curriculum for dental students – an experiential training approach. BMC Med Educ 2018; 18(1): 55.

26.   Boonyasai RT, Windish DM, Chakraborti C, Feldman LS, Rubin HR, Bass EB. Effectiveness of Teaching Quality Improvement to Clinicians: A Systematic Review. JAMA 2007; 298(9): 1023.

27.   Ogrinc G, Headrick LA, Mutha S, Coleman MT, OʼDonnell J, Miles PV. A Framework for Teaching Medical Students and Residents about Practice-based Learning and Improvement, Synthesized from a Literature Review: Acad Med 2003; 78(7): 748–56.

28.   McKenzie S, Mellis C. Practically prepared? Pre-intern student views following an education package. Adv Med Educ Pract 2017; 8: 111–20.

29.   Bradham TS, Sponsler KC, Watkins SC, Ehrenfeld JM. Creating a Quality Improvement Course for Undergraduate Medical Education: Practice What You Teach. Acad Med 2018; 93(10): 1491–6.

30.   Krajnović D, Bulat P, Bojanić V, Ilić J. Quality Assurance Standards for Student Professional Practice Placement in Health Professions Education [Internet]. Belgrade, 2018. [cited 2020 Feb 10]. Available from: https://refeehs.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Standardi.pdf>

31.   Đukić-Ćosić D, Tasić Lj. Interprofessional education [Internet]. Belgrade, 2018. [cited 2020 Feb 10]. Available from: https://refeehs.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/IPE.pdf

32.   Medić S, Parojčić J, Odalović M, Đukić-Ćosić D, Radulović L, Stančić M, et al. Teaching competencies development and evaluation: Guidelines for quality health professions education [Internet]. Belgrade, 2018. [cited 2020 Feb 10]. Available from: https://refeehs.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Teaching
/>-competencies-development-handbook.pdf

33.   Lindqvist S, Anderson E, Diack L, Reeves S. CAIPE Fellows statement on integrative care [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://www.caipe.org/resources/publications/caipe-publicati
/>ons/lindqvist-s-anderson-e-diack-l-reeves-s-2017-caipe-fellows
-statement-integrative-care

Published
2022/12/23
Section
Original Paper