Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp DOI: * Differences in At

Similar documents
Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Analysis of

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: IPA * Analysis of Perc


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on Teache

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: 3 * Effects of 9th


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: Awareness, Supports

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * Strenghening the Cap

ๆญฏ1.PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: : A basic research

,,,.,,,, (, 2013).,.,, (,, 2011). (, 2007;, 2008), (, 2005;,, 2007).,, (,, 2010;, 2010), (2012),,,.. (, 2011:,, 2012). (2007) 26%., (,,, 2011;, 2006;

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Grounds and Cons

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: * The

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: An Exploratory Stud

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: 3 * The Effect of H

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: The Effect of Caree

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * Early Childhood T

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: NCS : G * The Analy

์ƒ๋‹ดํ•™์—ฐ๊ตฌ,, SPSS 21.0., t,.,,,..,.,.. (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: /

., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, 23 3 (, ) () () 25, (),,,, (,,, 2015b). 1 5,

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: * Review of Research


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * Experiences of Af

230 ํ•œ๊ตญ๊ต์œกํ•™์—ฐ๊ตฌ ์ œ20๊ถŒ ์ œ3ํ˜ธ I. ์„œ ๋ก  ์ฒญ์†Œ๋…„์˜ ์–ธ์–ด๊ฐ€ ๊ฑฐ์น ์–ด์ง€๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๊ฐœใ……ใ„ฒ, ใ…†ใ…‚๋†ˆ(๋…„), ๋ฏธ์นœใ…†ใ„ฒ, ๋‹ฅ์ณ, ์— ์ฐฝ, ๋’ค์ ธ ๋“ฑ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๋ง์€ ์ฃผ์œ„์—์„œ ์‰ฝ๊ฒŒ ๋“ค์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋ง๊ณผ ๊ธ€์ด ์ ์ฐจ ๋œ์†Œ๋ฆฌ๋‚˜ ๊ฑฐ์„ผ์†Œ๋ฆฌ๋กœ ๋ฐ”๋€Œ๊ณ , ์™ธ ๊ตญ์–ด ๋‚จ์šฉ๊ณผ ์‚ฌ์ด๋ฒ„ ๋ฌธํ™”์˜ ์ต๋ช…์„ฑ ๋“ฑ

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: (NCS) Method of Con

ๆญฏ14.์–‘๋ˆ๊ทœ.hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: : Researc

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: * Suggestions of Ways

. 45 1,258 ( 601, 657; 1,111, 147). Cronbach ฮฑ=.67.95, 95.1%, Kappa.95.,,,,,,.,...,.,,,,.,,,,,.. :,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Study on the Pe

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

:,,.,. 456, 253 ( 89, 164 ), 203 ( 44, 159 ). Cronbach ฮฑ= ,.,,..,,,.,. :,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on the Opti

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: (LiD) - - * Way to

27 2, 17-31, , * ** ***,. K 1 2 2,.,,,.,.,.,,.,. :,,, : 2009/08/19 : 2009/09/09 : 2009/09/30 * 2007 ** *** ( :

ๆญฏ5-2-13(์ „๋ฏธํฌ์™ธ).PDF

๋„๋น„๋ผ

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: : * Discussions on

ํŠน์ˆ˜๊ต์œก๋…ผ์ด * ,,,,..,..,, 76.7%.,,,.,,.. * 1. **

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Analysis on the E

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Mediating Eff

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Effect of Paren

ํ•œ๊ตญ์„ฑ์ธ์—์„œ์ดˆ๊ธฐํ™ฉ๋ฐ˜๋ณ€์„ฑ์งˆํ™˜๊ณผ ์—ฐ๊ด€๋œ์œ„ํ—˜์š”์ธ์—ฐ๊ตฌ

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp.1-16 DOI: * A Study on Good School

27 2, * ** 3, 3,. B ,.,,,. 3,.,,,,..,. :,, : 2009/09/03 : 2009/09/21 : 2009/09/30 * ICAD (Institute for Children Ability


untitled

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: A study on Characte

<C7D1B1B9B1B3C0B0B0B3B9DFBFF85FC7D1B1B9B1B3C0B05F3430B1C733C8A35FC5EBC7D5BABB28C3D6C1BE292DC7A5C1F6C6F7C7D42E687770>

012์ž„์ˆ˜์ง„


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: : A Study on the Ac

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Educational Design

์ƒ๋‹ดํ•™์—ฐ๊ตฌ. 10,,., (CQR).,,,,,,.,,.,,,,. (Corresponding Author): / / 567 Tel: /


1..

์„œ๋ก  34 2

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: NCS : * A Study on

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: ICT * Exploring the Re

(5์ฐจ ํŽธ์ง‘).hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * Relationship Betw

ePapyrus PDF Document


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A S

์„œ๋ก 

ๆญฏkjmh2004v13n1.PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * Relationship among

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: * The Participant Expe

,......

09๊น€์ •์‹.PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.1-19 DOI: *,..,,,.,.,,,,.,,,,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on Organizi

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Research Trend

ๅคงๅญฆ๏ผ”ๅนด็”Ÿใฎๆญฃ็คพๅ“กๅ†…ๅฎš่ฆๅ› ใซ้–ขใ™ใ‚‹ๅฎŸ่จผๅˆ†ๆž

54 ํ•œ๊ตญ๊ต์œก๋ฌธ์ œ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ œ 27 ๊ถŒ 2 ํ˜ธ, I. 1.,,,,,,, (, 1998). 14.2% 16.2% (, ), OECD (, ) % (, )., 2, 3. 3

.. IMF.. IMF % (79,895 ). IMF , , % (, 2012;, 2013) %, %, %

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

<BFA9BAD02DB0A1BBF3B1A4B0ED28C0CCBCF6B9FC2920B3BBC1F62E706466>

Abstract Background : Most hospitalized children will experience physical pain as well as psychological distress. Painful procedure can increase anxie

KD hwp

27 2, 1-16, * **,,,,. KS,,,., PC,.,,.,,. :,,, : 2009/08/12 : 2009/09/03 : 2009/09/30 * ** ( :


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: - K * The Analysis

KIM Sook Young : Lee Jungsook, a Korean Independence Activist and a Nurse during the ์ด๋ฉฐ ๋‚˜๋ฆ„ ์˜์‹์ด ๊นจ์–ด์žˆ๋˜ ์ง€์‹์ธ๋“ค์ด๋ผ ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์„ ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค. ๊ต์œก์„ ๋ฐ›์€ ๊ฐ„ ํ˜ธ๋ถ€๋“ค์€ ํ™˜์ž๋ฅผ ๋Œ๋ณด๋Š” ๊ทธ๋“ค์˜ ์ง์—…์  ์†Œ

,126,865 43% (, 2015).,.....,..,.,,,,,, (AMA) Lazer(1963)..,. 1977, (1992)

ร€รฅยพร–ยฟรยฐรญยฟรซ ยณยปรรถ

Kor. J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., ๋ผ์ดํ”„์Šคํƒ€์ผ์€ ๊ฐœ์ธ ์ƒํ™œ์— ์žˆ์–ด ์‹ฌ๋ฆฌ์  ๋ฌธํ™”์  ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ๋ชจ๋“  ์ธก๋ฉด์˜ ์ƒํ™œ๋ฐฉ์‹๊ณผ ์ฐจ์ด ์ „์ฒด๋ฅผ ๋งํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋ผ์ดํ”„์Šค ํƒ€์ผ์€ ์‚ฌ๋žŒ์˜ ๋‚ด์žฌ๋œ ๊ฐ€์น˜๊ด€์ด๋‚˜ ์š•๊ตฌ, ํ–‰๋™ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜์—ฌ ์†Œ๋น„ํ–‰๋™๊ณผ ์‹ฌ๋ฆฌ๋ฅผ ์ถ”์ธกํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๊ณ , ๊ฐœ์ธ์˜

< FC3D6C1BEBCF6C1A45FB1E2B5B6B1B3B1B3C0B0B3EDC3D E687770>

<313120B9DABFB5B1B82E687770>

WHO ์˜์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด๊ตญ์ œ์žฅ์• ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜ (ICF) ์—๋Œ€ํ•œ์ดํ•ด์™€๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์ ์žฅ์• ๊ฐœ๋…์˜ํ•„์š”์„ฑ ( ํ™ฉ์ˆ˜๊ฒฝ ) ๊Œ™ 127 ๋…ธ๋™์ •์ฑ…์—ฐ๊ตฌ ์ œ 4 ๊ถŒ์ œ 2 ํ˜ธ pp.127~148 c ํ•œ๊ตญ๋…ธ๋™์—ฐ๊ตฌ์› WHO ์˜์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด๊ตญ์ œ์žฅ์• ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜ (ICF) ์—๋Œ€ํ•œ์ดํ•ด์™€๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์ ์žฅ์• ๊ฐœ๋…์˜ํ•„์š”์„ฑํ™ฉ์ˆ˜๊ฒฝ *, (disabi

<BFCFBCBA30362DC0B1BFECC3B62E687770>

<31335FB1C7B0E6C7CABFDC2E687770>

Analyses the Contents of Points per a Game and the Difference among Weight Categories after the Revision of Greco-Roman Style Wrestling Rules Han-bong

141(26) () ( ( ) () () () ) 2) 1932 ()()3) 2 1) ( ) ( ) () () () 4) ( ) 5) 6) ) ) ( ) () 42 () )

2 I.์„œ ๋ก  ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ๊ฐ•๋ ฅ์‚ฌ๊ณ ๊ฐ€ ํ•ด๋งˆ๋‹ค ๋ฐœ์ƒํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค.๋ฒ”ํ–‰ ์žฅ์†Œ๋„ ํ•™๊ต ์•ˆํŒŽ์„ ๊ฐ€๋ฆฌ์ง€ ์•Š๋Š”๋‹ค.์ด์ œ๋Š” ํ•™๊ต ์•ˆ๊นŒ์ง€ ์นจ์ž…ํ•˜์—ฌ ์Šค์Šค๋Ÿผ์—†์ด ๋ฒ”ํ–‰์„ ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ํ˜„์‹ค ์ด ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค.2008๋…„ 12์›” 11์ผ ํ•™๊ต์— ๋“ฑ๊ตํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ํ•™์ƒ(์—ฌ,8์„ธ)์„ ๊ตํšŒ ์•ˆ ํ™”์žฅ ์‹ค๋กœ ๋‚ฉ์น˜ํ•˜์—ฌ

<35BFCFBCBA2E687770>


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Structural Rel

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: : A Case Study on T

<31342DC0CCBFEBBDC42E687770>

Transcription:

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp.429-450 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.29.4.201912.429 * Differences in Attitudes to Patient Safety and Readiness for Interprofessional Learning in Medical Students according by Gender and Grade Purpose: Necessity about interprofessional cooperation keeps on increasing and patient safety is also highlighted in the medical community. However, there is a lack of awareness of patient safety and interprofessional cooperation among medical students. Therefore, this study aims to find out the grade and gender-based difference among medical students through questionnaire, and then examines the relationship between attitude toward patient safety and readiness for interprofessional cooperation. Method: The survey on grade and gender-based differences in attitudes toward patient safety and readiness for interprofessional cooperation was conducted through a questionnaire survey of 500 medical students from two medical school. For perception of patient safety, APSQ-III was used, and RIPLS was used for readiness for interprofessional cooperation. For the study analysis, we used a two-way ANOVA and simple regression analysis Results: There were significant differences in attitudes to patient safety by grade and gender are sub-factors: Patient safety training received to date, Error reporting, Error inevitability, Team functioning, Patient s role in error, Importance of patient safety in the curriculum. Team-work and collaboration, and professional identity, which are sub-factors of Readiness of healthcare students for interprofessional learning, differed significantly by grade and gender. Teamwork and collaboration have been shown to influence on attitudes to patient safety. Conclusion: This study is expected to raise awareness of patient safety and interprofessional cooperation in the medical education curriculum. It may also help to establish the direction of how patient safety awareness education, including interprofessional collaboration in medical education, should be conducted by grade. Key words : patient safety attitudes, readiness for interprofessional learning, medical students, medical education * 2019. Corresponding Author: Yune, So-Jung. Pusan National University School of Medicine, Dept. of Medical Education, Busandaehakro 49, Yangsan, Korea, e-mail: cc139@pusan.ac.kr

. 20 (, 2009).,...,,, (,,,,, 2005; Blendon et al., 2002).,,, (Brennan et al., 1991).,.,,,,,., (Gilbert, 2005)., (Walton & Kerridge, 2014)., (,,,,, 2005). (, 2009). (Wong, Levinson, & Shojania, 2012), (Roh, 2019). (, 2009), (Roh, 2019).,.

,...,,, (, 2017;,, 2014;,,, 2019;,, 2015;,,, 2017), (,, 2018). (, 2018;,, 2018),., WHO (WHO, 1988), 3 4 (,, 2018).,,..,..,?,?,?.,

. 75.6%, 46.3%. 83.1%, 46.3% (Mayer, Klamen, Gunderson, & Barach, 2009). (,,,,, 2005),. 4, 17.7%, 5.9% (Roh, Park, & Kim, 2015).,.,,...,, (Roh, Park, & Kim, 2015)., 2008 4 3,, (Roh et al., 2010). (,,, 2012), 3 3.,, (Kim, Kang, & Kim, 2007; Roh, Park, & Kim, 2015).,..

(Gilbert, 2005). (Interprofessional Education) (WHO, 1988). (Oandasan & Reeves, 2005)., (Mayer, Klamen, Gunderson, & Barach, 2009; Walton et al., 2010).. (Ryan & McKenna, 1994). 3.,.,, (PBL) (Parsell & Bligh, 1998).,,,.,, (Parsell & Bligh, 1998).,.,,,,,. (Pollard, Miers, & Gilchrist, 2004), 3, 4 (Carruthers, Lawton, Sandars, Howe, & Perry, 2009). (Conrad, 1988; Hafferty, 2006).,., (Wilhelmsson, Ponzer, Dahlgren, Timpka, & Faresjö, 2011). PBL

(Problem Based Learning; PBL)., PBL (Reynolds, 2003).,.. 2019 7 1 4.,. 619, 541 ( 87.4%). 1 2 3 4 78 82 95 91 346 % 22.5% 23.7% 27.5% 26.3% 100.0% % 64.5% 64.1% 66.0% 61.5% 64.0% % 14.4% 15.2% 17.6% 16.8% 64.0% 43 46 49 57 195 % 22.1% 23.6% 25.1% 29.2% 100.0% % 35.5% 35.9% 34.0% 38.5% 36.0% % 7.9% 8.5% 9.1% 10.5% 36.0% 121 128 144 148 541 % 22.4% 23.7% 26.6% 27.4% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 22.4% 23.7% 26.6% 27.4% 100.0%

Carruthers, Lawton, Sandars, Howe Perry(2009) (Attitudes to Patient Safety Questionnaire, APSQ-III). Carruthers, Lawton, Sandars, Howe Perry(2009) 9 26, (Cronbach α).64.82. 1, 1, 2, 1, 1 20. (Cronbach α).858,.512.860. Del Bigio, Mulhall, Shevchuk & Mansell(2016) (Readiness of healthcare students for interprofessional learning scale, RIPLS). 19, Likert 5 1 ( ) 5 ( ). (team-work and collaboration), (professional identity), (roles and responsibility) 3, Cronbach α.70.95., (Cronbach α).893.653. Cronbach α 3.860 2.766 3.833 2.725 2.681 2.512 2.836 2.807 2.657 20.858 9.893 7.653 16.874

. Tukey, Tamhane T2.,. SPSS 23.0 for Windows(SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA).. < IV-1>, < IV-2>.,,,,,., (F=4.66, p=0.003) (F=10.58, p=0.001), (F=3.66, p=0.12). 4 (M=14.19, SD=3.18) (M=12.54, SD=3.47). 1 2, 3 4. 1 (M=15.22, SD=2.99) 1 (M=13.12, SD=3.23), 2 (M=14.98, SD=3.09) (M=14.44, SD=3.49). 2 (M=14.98, SD=3.09) 2 (M=14.44, SD=3.49), 3 (M=14.31, SD=3.45) 3 (M=14.99, SD=3.55) < IV-1>., (F=4.31,

p=0.005). 2(M=10.91, SD=2.00) 3(M=11.06, SD=32.31) 4(M=10.22, SD=2.21). (F=9.505, p=0.000). 1(M=12.21, SD=1.63), 2(M=12.11, SD=1.81), 3(M=11.97, SD=2.16) 4(M=11.08, SD=2.31). (F=3.58, p=0.014), 2(M=11.05, SD=2.16), 3(M=10.96, SD=2.05) 4 (M=10.29, SD=2.39). (F=4.63, p=0.003), 1(M=11.45, SD=1.83), 3(M=11.31, SD=2.05) 4(M=10.62, SD=2.11). (F=6.81, p=0.003) 1(M=11.15, SD=1.64), 2(M=10.88, SD=1.91), 3(M=10.94, SD=1.99) 4(M=10.15, SD=2.09)., (F=6.55, p=0.000), 1(M=108.37, SD=10.32), 2(M=107.55, SD=12.44), 3(M=107.53, SD=13.12) 4(M=102.43, SD=14.21)..,,,,,,, 4 1 2 3. 1 2 3 4 M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) 15.22 (2.99) 10.83 (2.49) 17.97 (2.91) 12.33 (1.68) 9.22 (2.19) 9.82 (2.38) 10.97 (1.97) 13.12 (3.23) 10.84 (2.00) 17.67 (2.79) 11.98 (1.52) 9.79 (2.01) 10.47 (1.72) 10.81 (1.97) 14.44 (3.49) 10.73 (2.02) 17.79 (2.84) 12.07 (1.96) 9.18 (2.44) 9.91 (2.44) 11.09 (2.26) 14.98 (3.09) 11.24 (1.93) 18.35 (2.41) 12.17 (1.52) 8.89 (2.59) 9.80 (2.21) 10.98 (2.01) 14.99 (3.55) 11.19 (2.14) 17.85 (3.09) 12.13 (2.08) 8.93 (2.78) 9.68 (2.45) 10.97 (2.14) 14.31 (3.45) 10.82 (2.10) 17.61 (3.04) 11.67 (2.29) 9.49 (2.32) 9.57 (2.30) 10.94 (1.90) 14.19 (3.18) 10.40 (2.23) 17.34 (3.07) 11.34 (2.08) 9.14 (2.69) 9.64 (2.46) 10.38 (2.09) 12.54 (3.47) 9.95 (2.44) 17.12 (3.63) 10.67 (2.61) 9.60 (2.36) 10.40 (2.37) 10.14 (2.81)

( ) 1 2 3 4 M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) 11.46 (1.85) 11.26 (1.62) 109.09 (11.11) 11.44 (1.83) 10.95 (1.68) 107.07 (8.69) 10.96 (2.42) 10.67 (1.96) 106.85 (13.27) 11.11 (2.08) 11.26 (1.77) 108.78 (10.85) 11.21 (2.05) 10.97 (1.89) 107.92 (13.68) 11.49 (2.05) 10.90 (2.19) 106.80 (12.06) 10.77 (1.93) 10.18 (2.08) 103.37 (12.55) 10.39 (2.37) 10.11 (2.11) 100.91 (16.54) SS df MS F p post hoc 154.19 3 51.40 4.66.003 2.3>4 116.79 1 116.79 10.58.001 * 121.14 3 40.38 3.66.012 5884.25 533 11.04 62.28 3 20.76 4.31.005 2.3>4.74 1.74.15.695 * 17.83 3 5.94 1.24.296 2565.70 533 4.81 48.72 3 16.24 1.80.147.32 1.32.04.851 * 14.67 3 4.89.54.654 4819.45 533 9.04 115.60 3 38.53 9.51.000 1.2.3>4 14.77 1 14.77 3.64.057 * 9.99 3 3.33.82.482 2160.85 533 4.05 14.33 3 4.78.78.506 13.02 1 13.02 2.12.146 * 15.32 3 5.11.83.477 3270.72 533 6.14 18.31 3 6.10 1.11.346 10.89 1 10.89 1.98.160 * 21.37 3 7.12 1.29.276 2939.11 533 5.51 50.24 3 16.75 3.58.014 2.3>4 2.26 1 2.26.48.487 *.82 3.27.06.982 2493.98 533 4.68

( ) SS df MS F p post hoc 60.37 3 20.12 4.63.003 1,3>4.00 1.00.00.977 * 8.30 3 2.77.64.592 2319.03 533 4.35 75.85 3 25.28 6.81.000 1,2,3>4.17 1.17.04.833 * 13.00 3 4.33 1.17.321 1977.71 533 3.71 3179.82 3 1059.94 6.55.000 1,2,3>4 104.15 1 104.15.64.423 * 356.88 3 118.96.74.532 86304.38 533 161.92 < IV-3>, < IV-4>.

1 2 3 4 M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) 37.60 (4.41) 24.96 (3.18) 62.56 (6.74) 37.67 (3.75) 25.70 (2.84) 63.37 (5.53) 34.12 (5.57) 23.98 (2.95) 58.10 (7.45) 35.27 (4.84) 24.04 (3.76) 59.22 (7.97) 34.76 (5.76) 24.00 (3.95) 58.76 (8.80) 34.53 (5.32) 23.96 (3.85) 58.49 (8.34) 33.98 (5.24) 24.05 (4.02) 58.03 (8.44) 32.28 (5.82) 22.65 (3.43) 54.93 (7.64) SS df MS F p post hoc 1284.38 3 428.13 15.74.000 1>2,3,4 3.86 1 3.86.14.707 * 132.82 3 44.27 1.63.182 14466.80 532 27.19 248.85 3 82.95 6.55.000 1>2,3,4 3.190 1 3.19.25.616 * 78.10 3 26.03 2.06.105 6749.45 533 12.66 2666.84 3 888.95 14.62.000 1>2,3,4 15.92 1 15.92.26.609 * 363.35 3 121.12 1.99.114 32358.52 532 60.82,,., (F=15.74, p=0.000), (F=6.55, p=0.000), (F=14.62, p=0.000),.., 1(M=37.63, SD=4.17) 2(M=34.53, SD=5.33), 3(M=34.68, SD=5.60), 4(M=33.32, SD=5.51), 1(M=35.22, SD=3.08) 2(M=24.00, SD=3.25), 3(M=23.99, SD=3.90), 4(M=23.51, SD=3.85), 1(M=62.85, SD=6.32) 2(M=58.50, SD=7.63), 3(M=58.67, SD=8.62), 4(M=56.84, SD=8.25).

, r=-.17 r=.65. (r=.63, p<.001). (r=.55, p<.001), (r=-.17, p<.001). (r=.59, p<.001). r=-.18 r=.54. (r=.54, p<.001)., (r=-.18, p<.001). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. - 2..38 ** - 3..18 **.38 *** - 4..13 **.39 ***.59 *** - 5. -.17.06.19 ***.25 *** - 6..00.36 ***.18 ***.21 ***.22 *** - 7..29 ***.35 ***.35 **.37 ***.01.26 *** - 8..31 ***.42 ***.42 ***.50 ***.11 **.26 ***.63 *** - 9..33 ***.40 ***.33 ***.36 *** -.02.19 ***.55 ***.54 *** - 10..31 ***.29 ***.27 ***.36 *** -.02.14 **.45 ***.46 ***.54 *** - 11..32 ***.18 ***.12 **.16 *** -.18 *** -.03.30 ***.28 ***.38 ***.59 *** - * p<.05, ** p<.01, *** p<.001 < IV-6>. Durbin-Watson 1 3, VIF 10.

. 15% 35%. M SD B β t p R 2 37.63 4.17 1.15.46 4.93.000 1.22 25.22 3.07.15.04.46.644 34.53 5.32 1.12.48 5.24.000.24 2 23.97 3.24.09.02.26.797 34.68 5.60 1.02.44 4.36.000.15 3 23.99 3.90 -.24 -.07 -.70.485 33.32 5.51 1.61.62 7.89.000.35 4 23.51 3.85 -.17 -.05 -.60.553 35.04 12.87 1.21.51 8.67.000.22 24.23 3.60 -.30 -.08-1.40.162 34.74 5.39 1.31.55 7.76.000.34 23.96 3.64.22.06.88.379 34.93 5.43 1.24.53 11466.000.26 24.13 3.61 -.10 -.03 -.62.536.,..,. 4.,,,, 4.., (Myung et al., 2012).

(Carruthers, Lawton, Sandars, Howe, & Perry, 2009). 1 (, 2012),..,,.,, (Roh, 2019;, 2009)..., (Yoo & Park, 2015).,, 3, 4 1, 2. 2 3 1 4..,,.,,.. 2-3 (Ban, 2017). (, 2019), (2015).,.. (,,,,, 2005).,, 3. 1 2, 3, 1 2

, 3. 1 2, 3 4., 2, 3,..,..,.,. 1.,, (Conrad, 1988; Hafferty, 2006). (Lindh Falk, Hammar, & Nyström, 2015),. (Pollard, Miers, & Gilchrist, 2004),, (Tunstall-Pedoe, Rink, & Hilton, 2003). 4,...,,.,. 2, 2,, (Lindh Falk, Hammar, &

Nyström, 2015)... (Bar, Leurer, Warshawski, & Itzhaki, 2018),..,,.. 60% (, 2012).. (Ryan & McKenna, 1994). (Zwarenstein & Bryant, 2008).,,. (Kyrkjebø, Brattebø, & Smith-Strøm, 2006).,,, (Kim, Kang, & Kim, 2007).,,..,,.,,,,.,.

.512.,.,.,,,, (2005).. (4), 110-135.,,,,,, (2012).. (2), 213-221.,,,,,,,,,,, (2018).,. (2), 26-40. (2017).,. (2), 71-79., (2014).,. (1), 5-14. (2019).,..,, (2019). :. (1), 219-227. (2009).. (3), 217-228.,. (2018).. (1), 23-29.,, (2017).. (1), 75-85., (2015).. (8), 5458-5467. (2015).

.. Ban, K. A., Chung, J. W., Matulewicz, R. S., Kelz, R. R., Shea, J. A., Dahlke, A. R., Quinn, C. M., Yang, A. D., & Bilimoria, K. Y. (2017). Gender-based differences in surgical residents' perceptions of patient safety, continuity of care, and well-being: an analysis from the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) trial. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 224(2), 126-136. Bar, M. A., Leurer, M. K., Warchawski, S., & Itzhaki, M. (2018). The role of personal resilience and personality traits of healthcare students on their attitudes towards interprofessional collaboration. Nurse Education Today, 61, 36-42. Blendon, R. J., DesRoches, C. M., Brodie, M., Benson, J. M., Rosen, A. B., Schneider, E., Altman, D. E., Zapert, K., Herrmann, M., and Steffenson, A. E. (2002). Views of Practicing Physicians and the Public on Medical Errors. New England Journal of Medicine, 347, 1933-1940. Brennan, T. A., Leape, L. L., Laird, N. M., Hebert, L., Localio, A. R., Lawthers, A. G., Newhouse, J. P., Weiler, P. C., & Hiatt, H. H. (1991). Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. New England journal of medicine, 324(6), 370-376. Carruthers, S., Lawton, R., Sandars, J., Howe, A., & Perry, M. (2009). Attitudes to patient safety amongst medical students and tutors: Developing a reliable and valid measure. Medical Teacher, 31(8), e370-e376. Conrad, P. (1988). Learning to doctor: Reflections on recent accounts of the medical school years. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 29(4), 323-332. Curran, V. R., Sharpe, D., Forristall, J., & Flynn, K. (2008). Attitudes of health sciences students towards interprofessional teamwork and education. Learning in Health and Social Care, 7(3), 146-156. Del Bigio, S., Mulhall, S., Shevchuk, Y., & Mansell, H. (2016). Perceptions of teamwork and interprofessional education in undergraduate pharmacy students. Pharmacy Education, 16(1), 199-209. Gilbert, J. H. (2005). Interprofessional education for collaborative, patient-centred practice. Nursing leadership, 18(2), 32-36. Hafferty, F. W. (2006). Professionalism The next wave. N Engl J Med; 355(20), 2151-2152. Kyrkjebø, J. M., Brattebø, G., & Smith-Strøm, H. (2006). Improving patient safety by using interprofessional simulation training in health professional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 20(5), 507-516. Kim, E. K., Kang, M. A., & Kim, H. J. (2007). Experience and perception on patient safety culture of employees in hospitals. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration, 13, 321-334.

Reynolds, F. (2003). Initial experiences of interprofessional problem-based learning: a comparison of male and female students' views. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 17(1), 35-44. Roh, H. (2019). Patient Safety Education for Medical Students: Global Trends and Korea's Status. Korean Med Educ Rev, 21(1), 1. Roh, H., Park, S. J., & Kim, T. (2015). Patient safety education to change medical students' attitudes and sense of responsibility. Medical Teacher, 37(10), 908-914. Roh, H., Lee, K. U., Lee, Y. S., Kim, O. J., Kim, S. W., & Choi, J. W. (2010). Effect of patient safety education in surgical clerkship to develop competencies for managing and preventing medical errors. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 22(4), 303-311. Ryan, A. A., & McKenna, H. P. (1994). A comparative study of the attitudes of nursing and medical students to aspects of patient care and the nurse's role in organizing that care. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19(1), 114-123. Hiatt, H. (1991). The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. New England Journal of Medicine, 324(6), 377-384. Lee, H. Y., & Lee, S. G. (2018). Medical Students Perceptions and Intentions Regarding Patient Safety. Quality Improvement in Health Care, 24(1), 23-29. Lindh Falk, A., Hammar, M., & Nyström, S. (2015). Does gender matter? Differences between students at an interprofessional training ward. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 29(6), 616-621. Mayer, D., Klamen, D. L., Gunderson, A., & Barach, P. (2009). Designing a patient safety undergraduate medical curriculum: the Telluride Interdisciplinary Roundtable experience. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 21(1), 52-58. Myung, S. J., Shin, J. S., Kim, J. H., Roh, H., Kim, Y., Kim, J., Kim, G. J., Lee, S. I, Lee J., & Kim, S. W. (2012). The patient safety curriculum for undergraduate medical students as a first step toward improving patient safety. Journal of Surgical Education, 69(5), 659-664. Oandasan, I., & Reeves, S. (2005). Key elements for interprofessional education. Part 1: The learner, the educator and the learning context. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(sup1), 21-38. Parsell, G., & Bligh, J. (1998). Interprofessional learning. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 74(868), 89-95. Pollard, K. C., Miers, M. E., & Gilchrist, M. (2004). Collaborative learning for collaborative working? Initial findings from a longitudinal study of health and social care students. Health & Social Care in the Community, 12(4), 346-358. Tunstall-Pedoe, S., Rink, E., & Hilton, S. (2003). Student attitudes to undergraduate interprofessional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 17(2), 161-172. Walton, M., Woodward, H., Van Staalduinen, S., Lemer, C., Greaves, F., Noble, D., Ellis, B., Donaldson,

L., & Barraclough, B. (2010). The WHO patient safety curriculum guide for medical schools. BMJ Quality & Safety, 19(6), 542-546. Walton, M., & Kerridge, I. (2014). Do no harm: is it time to rethink the Hippocratic O ath?. Medical Education, 48(1), 17-27. Wilhelmsson, M., Ponzer, S., Dahlgren, L. O., Timpka, T., & Faresjö, T. (2011). Are female students in general and nursing students more ready for teamwork and interprofessional collaboration in healthcare?. BMC Medical Education, 11(1), 15. Wong, B. M., Levinson, W., Shojania, K. G. (2012). Quality improvement in medical education: current state and future directions. Medical Education, 46(1), 107-119. World Health Organization. (1988). Learning together to work together for health: report of a WHO Study Group on Multiprofessional Education of Health Personnel: the Team Approach [meeting held in Geneva from 12 to 16 October 1987]. Yoo, H. H., & Park, K. H. (2015). The differences in self-efficacy in clinical performance between medical students and residents. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 27(3), 221-225. Zwarenstein, M., & Bryant, W. (2008). Intervenciones para promover la colaboración entre enfermeras y médicos (Revisión Cochrane traducida). La Biblioteca Cochrane Plus, 3. : 2019. 10. 31. / : 2019. 11. 13. / : 2019. 12. 20.

:..,,. : 2 500. APSQ-III, RIPLS.. :,,,,,.,., 15.0% 35.0%. :..