Figure 1
The Prisma flow diagram.
* WoS = Web of Science
From: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372: n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/.
Table 1
An overview of the included papers.
| FIRST AUTHOR, YEAR OF PUBLICATION, COUNTRY | PARTICIPANTS | DESCRIPTION | CLASSROOM BASED SETTING | WORKPLACE BASED SETTING | DURATION OF THE PROGRAM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E.S. Anderson, 2010, United Kingdom | Medical, nursing, social work, and speech and language therapy students. They are all completing practice learning placements towards the end of their training. | The students cared for one in-patient, explored discharge processes and policies, and considered how the social and medical models of care are combined to support patient choice based on their needs. They explored the contributions of all members of the ward clinical team. At the end of the week, the student team presented their patient case to the ward team offering solutions to problems in an interactive feedback session. | • | 4 or 5 days | |
| S.A. Balogun, 2015, United States | Third-year medical and fourth-year nursing students. | The workshop features a clinical case of a woman with dementia that is being transitioned from the hospital to her home. The workshop addresses interprofessional communication and issues on discharge from the hospital and at home. | • | 90 minutes | |
| S.E. Hart, 2021, United States | Interprofessional teams of four to six students, representing medicine, nursing, pharmacy, public health, physical therapy, and social work. | Students finish a foundational curriculum after which teams of students from different professions are paired with patients having complex needs (student hotspotting). | • | • | 2 hours/week for 6 months |
| M. T. Heflin, 2013, United States | Two students from each profession with a target total of six to 12 students in medicine, nursing, physical therapy, physician assistants, pharmacy, and social work. | To learn to improve transitions in care, interprofessional teams work on quality improvement projects: a series of learning experiences consisting of in-person sessions, between course readings and practical exercises, and web-based discussions. | • | The fall semester | |
| T. Imam, 2019, United Kingdom | Geriatric specialist trainees and GP registrars. | Joint GP-geriatric trainee clinic within primary care | • | 6 months | |
| F. Kent, 2014, Australia | Fourth- or fifth-year medical students and final- year students from nursing, nutrition and dietetics, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, podiatry, pharmacy, psychology, social work and speech pathology | Interprofessional student-led-aged clinic for recently discharged elderly where they take care of their unmet healthcare needs | • | Not specified | |
| M.E. Keough, 2002, United States | Medical residents and family practice residents. | On-site interactive seminars focused on effective communication based on a clinical case selected by team members of the Elder Service Plan group (ESP). The ESP program is an all-inclusive care program to preserve the health and independence of its participants. | • | Not specified | |
| A. Lathia, 2015, United States | Medical students within the geriatrics rotation at the Cleveland Clinic. | A mixed program of discussions – tour through the care units – observations – talking about in-service problems. The program supplements standard geriatric didactics during the medical student primary care rotation about transitions of care. | • | • | 7 hours |
| Y.S. Meah, 2012, United States | Third year medical students. | Non-traditional longitudinal interdisciplinary clerkship (LIC): foundational ambulatory care venues of the standard curriculum traditionally taught singularly during the block clerkships are transformed into a multidisciplinary integrated longitudinal experience. | • | 8-11 weeks | |
| M.C. Mecca, 2014, United States | An interdisciplinary group of trainees within the Veteran Affairs Connecticut Center for Excellence in Primary Care Education. | Students are offered a multifaceted curriculum that includes interactive didactic sessions co-led by a geriatrician and allied health service staff, in addition to clinical experiences for translating education into practice. If they are interested, students are offered to perform a quality improvement project. | • | • | Not specified |
| L. B. da Motta, 2014, Brazil | Residents (defined as a graduation course) in medicine, nursing, physiotherapy, nutrition, psychology, and social services. | Six longitudinal interprofessional practical scenarios: outpatient, infirmary, educational actions, neurogeriatric, home based care, and long term institutionalisation. They are taught over two years within the residency program and increase complexity. | • | 2 years | |
| K. Ouchida, 2009, United States | Third-year medical students completing their required internal medicine rotations. | An education intervention to foster essential elements of transitional care by Fast Forward Rounds: an interactive education program with lectures, interactive video, small-group discussion, and a team-based learning exercise. | • | 2 x 90 minutes | |
| S. Saffel-Shrier, 2012, United States | Second- and third-year family residents. | Family residents provide the primary care of two patients who live within an assisted living facility. The interprofessional faculty team supervises them. | • | 2 years | |
| J. Thornhill, 2002, United States | Medical students (undergraduate). | Students are paired with healthy elderly. During four years, students follow these elderly, talk about their multidimensional needs, and consult other healthcare professionals. The modules were designed to coordinate with other areas of the curriculum so that the students have an opportunity to put the learned concepts into practice. | • | • | 4 years |
| D. Vincent, 2014, United States | Medical residents | Follow-up home visits by a multidisciplinary team led by residents after the patient was discharged from the hospital. | • | Not specified | |
| G.C. Xakellis Jr, 2003, United States | Students in nursing, social work, public health, health administration, and medicine | A web tool that allows the learner to grapple with the essential challenges of improving care provided to a Medicare-aged population in the current health care environment. Students were asked to manage the health of a population of 5,000 seniors by dividing them into three categories: basically healthy, moderately ill, and severely ill. | • | It can be used as the basis for a one-time class discussion, a multiweek group project, or a complete master’s thesis. | |
| S. Yang, 2019, Canada | Medical students | Students role-played an elderly patient (with complex health needs) or their caregiver within five simulated healthcare professional appointments. | • | 150 minutes |
Table 2
Overview of the taught components of the WHO definition.
| FIRST AUTHOR, YEAR OF PUBLICATION | I. PEOPLE- CENTERED HEALTH SYSTEMS | II. COMPREHENSIVE DELIVERY OF QUALITY SERVICES ACROSS THE LIFE-COURSE | III. DESIGNED ACCORDING TO THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL NEEDS OF THE POPULATION AND THE INDIVIDUAL | IV. DELIVERED BY A COORDINATED MULTI- DISCIPLINARY TEAM OF PROVIDERS WORKING | V. ACROSS SETTINGS AND LEVELS OF CARE | VI.EFFECTIVELY MANAGED TO ENSURE OPTIMAL OUTCOMES | VII. THE APPROPRIATE USE OF RESOURCES BASED ON THE BESTAVAILABLEEVIDENCE | VIII. WITH FEEDBACK LOOPS TO CONTINUOUSLYIMPROVE PERFORMANCE | IX. TACKLE UPSTREAM CAUSES OF ILL HEALTH | X. PROMOTE WELL-BEING THROUGHINTERSECTORAL ANDMULTISECTORAL ACTIONS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E.S. Anderson, 2010 | • | • | • | • | • | • | ||||
| S.A. Balogun, 2015 | • | • | • | • | • | |||||
| S.E. Hart, 2021 | • | • | • | • | • | |||||
| M. T. Heflin, 2013 | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | |||
| T. Imam, 2019 | • | • | • | • | • | |||||
| F Kent, 2014 | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | |||
| M.E. Keough, 2002 | • | • | • | • | • | • | ||||
| A. Lathia, 2015 | • | • | • | • | • | |||||
| Y.S. Meah, 2012 | • | • | • | • | • | |||||
| M.C. Mecca, 2014 | • | • | • | • | ||||||
| L. B. da Motta, 2014 | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | ||
| K. Ouchida, 2009 | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | ||
| S. Saffel- Shrier, 2012 | • | • | • | • | • | |||||
| J. Thornhill, 2002 | • | • | • | • | • | • | ||||
| D. Vincent, 2014 | • | • | • | • | • | |||||
| G.C. Xakellis Jr, 2003 | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | |
| S. Yang, 2019 | • | • | • | • | • | • |
Appendix 1
Example of PubMed search string.