Interprofessionality and Continuing Education in Health: possibilities for transforming work and education in health in the Brazilian context

Background: The Unified Health System (SUS), established by the Federal Constitution of 1988, faces the ongoing challenge of meeting the complex health needs of the population through universal, equitable, and comprehensive care, which requires training and organizational processes capable of developing collaborative skills and strengthening practices guided by comprehensiveness and social justice.

In this scenario, Continuing Health Education (EPS), formalized by the National Policy for Continuing Health Education (PNEPS) in 2004, constitutes a central strategy for transforming training and work practices, articulating teaching, management, care, and social control. By drawing the principles of interprofessionality, it enhances collective processes of reflection and action that promote learning at work and the consolidation of collaborative practices committed to comprehensive care and the democratization of health relations.

 

Approach: This qualitative research study aimed to understand how the theoretical, conceptual, and methodological assumptions of interprofessionality are present in educational activities aimed at health professionals. The methodology integrated different strategies: theoretical analysis, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews with coordinators, teachers, and participants in educational activities in the five Brazilian regions. The approach follows the perspective of critical qualitative research, considering that meanings are constructed in historical, political, and institutional contexts.

 

Results: Thematic analysis of the content of the documents and participants' narratives identified meanings, similarities, and tensions in the incorporation of interprofessionality into educational activities, revealing different ways of understanding and implementing collaborative work in the context of the SUS. Analytical categories emerged that express both advances in the construction of pedagogical practices anchored in problematization, listening, and co-learning, as well as relational, organizational, contextual, and procedural challenges related to the maintenance of disciplinary logics, professional hierarchies, and institutional weaknesses. Based on the findings of this study, an educational material entitled “WORK THAT SHAPES, TRAINING THAT TRANSFORMS: Clues to facilitate the incorporation of interprofessionality in continuing education actions in health” was proposed. The material provides a set of suggestions that can inspire possible paths, respecting the singularities of each territory, each institutional reality, and each subject involved in training in and for health work.

 

Conclusion: Interprofessionality should be understood as an ethical-political project and not just as a technique. Its strengthening requires solid theoretical references, institutional investment, and alignment with the principles of the SUS. In Brazil, the history of struggles for the consolidation of the Unified Health System, as well as the existence of a Permanent Health Education Policy, constitute a favorable scenario for strengthening interprofessionality. Educational actions aimed at health professionals should express the intention to develop collaborative skills, supported by participatory pedagogies, capable of contributing to comprehensive and democratic health care practices. This path requires coordinated public policies, adequate funding, training support networks, and, above all, a collective commitment to a health model that recognizes the complexity of life and the power of shared action.