Abstract
Background Design thinking (DT) describes three stages in the design thinking cycle: 1) inspiration, which embodies the initial problem or opportunity; 2) ideation, which encompasses the development and refinement of ideas; and 3) implementation, which involves the introduction and application of the derived solution.
Method The prospective educational program evaluation July 2020 – December 2020. A 150 min interactive workshop regarding developing innovative elder pain care. Medical students will be grouping into four medical students: 1 technological student. Then they will be assigned to match with a technology student. The interprofessional education design thinking activity consists of three parts; a brief introduction, the brainstorming process to identified pain points by persona and user journey to generate the idea, and the prototype presentation.
Results Forty sixth-year medical students and twelve technological students participated. 58% of medical students and 95% of technological students perceived DT as very helpful for their careers. However, only 30% of medical students and 60% of technological students were inspired to develop actual prototypes after the course. Nearly all of the students responded they comfortable with this interdisciplinary project-based style. Still, the time of the workshop is too limited, and among those responding with no interest pursue the project gave a reason that they lack time after rotating to other courses.
Conclusion Most medical students and technological students perceived DT as beneficial for their career and displayed satisfy in this co-project style. However, finding matched schedule of two disciplines made long-term interpersonal education challenging.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project is funded by the 21ST Century learning grant year 2020 awarded by Chiang Mai university Teaching & Learning Innovation Center.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics approval: The Faculty of Medicine Chiang Mai university IRB (EXEMPTION 7462/2020). All participants provided verbal consent to survey and video recording.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data could be available on request.
