Table 6.
Modified Kirkpatrick’s framework (Barr et al.’s six-level classification adaptation) [155]
| Kirkpatrick outcome level | Outcome | Studies that achieved this outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Level 1 |
Participant reaction Learners’ views on the learning experience and its interprofessional nature |
• Participants reported decreased stress [133, 149, 151] • Participants had a positive experience with the intervention [3, 57, 138] |
| Level 2a | Change in own attitudes and change in attitudes towards team members of the interprofessional groups |
• Increased empathic tendency [130, 135, 146, 150, 153] |
| Level 2b |
Change in knowledge or skills Including knowledge and skills related to the interprofessional activity |
• Improvement in self-rated empathy scores using validated scales [1, 4, 8, 9, 11, 16, 19, 47–49, 52, 60, 61, 65, 68, 71–73, 75, 78, 79, 82, 87, 90, 94–96, 100, 104, 106, 108, 110, 114, 121, 123, 124, 127, 132, 137, 141] • Increased understanding of empathy from analysis of reflections or artworks [9, 51, 67, 71, 84, 92, 136, 139] |
| Level 3 |
Behavioural change Identify individual transfer of interprofessional learning |
• Improved empathic communication with standardised patients [2, 5, 7, 13, 15, 17, 40, 46, 50, 56, 60, 64, 88, 91, 99, 111, 112, 115–118, 120, 134, 147]. • Increased confidence with clinical interactions [77, 105, 126, 143, 144] |
| Level 4a |
Change in organisational practice Wider change in organisational practice and delivery of care |
• Increased sense of belonging among participants [122] |
| Level 4b |
Change in clinical outcome Improvement in patient care |
• Increased emphatic communication or attitudes with patients [6, 42, 43, 53, 62, 98, 103, 119] • Improved patient satisfaction [38, 39, 85] • Barriers to empathy and administrative changes to curb them were identified by participants [66, 70, 142] • Participants identified lapses in patient care [63] • Improved patient rated empathy score [12] |