Abstract

Background:Ethics education is essential to the education of all healthcare professionals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an interprofessional approach to ethics education to all students across an academic health science center.Research objectives:The objectives were to (1) compare student perception of ethics education before and after the implementation of the campus-wide ethics program and (2) determine changes in student ethical decision-making skills following implementation of a campus-wide ethics program.Research design:This study was a quasi-experimental design with seniors graduating prior to the intervention serving as the control group.Participants and research context:The setting was a comprehensive health science center in the southwestern United States. All students enrolled in the university participated in the intervention; however, 976 graduating students were used for evaluation of the intervention.Ethical considerations:Study materials for each survey were submitted to the university’s IRB, and the project was approved as exempt by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects. Student participation in the surveys was voluntary. No names or other identifying information were collected, and responses to the survey questions were kept confidential.Findings:Students’ perception of the adequacy of time spent on the ethics content in course instruction and practical training decreased from the baseline to the fifth-year survey. Students’ overall comfort level with their abilities to deal with ethical issues increased from the baseline to the fifth year. Student ethical decision-making skills were higher at the third-year evaluation for all indicators. For the fifth-year survey, responses were also higher scoring on all four indicators.Discussion:After participation in an interprofessional campus-wide effort on health professions ethics, students demonstrated higher ethical decision-making scores according to the Health Professional Ethics Rubric. However, their scores still did not reach the proficiency level identified in the rubric.Conclusion:Examination of the effectiveness of each part of the intervention is needed.