BACKGROUND: Interprofessional education (IPE) improves collaboration and patient care through joint education between health professions. Respiratory therapy (RT) faculty were surveyed to evaluate their knowledge and attitudes toward IPE. We report current opportunities for IPE from faculty and compare responses from associate's, bachelor's, and master's degree programs and profit versus nonprofit institutions. METHODS: We developed an online survey based on IPE literature and questions modified for the RT discipline. The survey was distributed by email to 874 faculty from the Commission on Accreditation for Respiratory Care accredited programs. RESULTS: The response rate was 33%. Faculty identified IPE as an important component of RT education ( n = 207, 80%) but reported challenges in integrating IPE into current curriculum. Overall, communication was ranked as the most important IPE competency ( n = 104, 39%) and ethics least important ( n = 131, 49%). When asked how many credit hours are required to teach IPE, 48% of respondents reported that they were unsure of an appropriate time requirement. Significant differences between associate's and bachelor's/master's degree program faculty were found on the following topics: institutional resources needed for IPE ( P < .001), faculty availability ( P < .001), curriculum availability for IPE ( P = .02), and importance of including IPE at academic health center campuses ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: IPE is recognized as an important component of RT education by all faculty respondents. However, significant differences in knowledge and attitudes toward IPE exist between faculty in associate's versus bachelor's/master's degree programs. Revisiting the current accreditation standards program may allow IPE to take a more prominent role in RT curricula.

Interprofessional education (IPE) improves collaboration and patient care through joint education between health professions. Respiratory therapy (RT) has not been previously evaluated as participants in IPE. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to evaluate the opportunities and barriers towards IPE of 874 respiratory therapy faculty with both quantitative measures and open-ended questions. Responses (n = 187) to open-ended questions about the opportunities and barriers to IPE inclusion included only one significant difference between Associate’s (n = 121, 64.7%) and Bachelor’s faculty (n = 66, 35.3%). Open-ended questions were analyzed using directed content analysis. Two trained independent reviewers examined responses for common categories. Reviewers then collated initial categories into broader categories. Faculty responses indicate the importance of IPE, barriers related to schedule and faculty attitudes, and perceived opportunities for IPE with nursing programs and through increasing simulation training opportunities. The most common barriers identified were faculty attitudes, scheduling and logistics, curriculum requirements, administration, and time. All faculty seemed to perceive similar opportunities and barriers regardless of programme type and are supportive of IPE inclusion within their curriculums.

RGD peptides have been incorporated into several gene delivery vehicles to enhance specific interactions of nonviral vehicles with the cell surface. However, there are contradictory results regarding the effect of linear RGD peptides on specific cell surface binding of polyethylene glycol (PEG)-conjugated gene delivery vehicles. This study sought to understand how coupling RGD peptides to PEG vehicles affects cell binding and internalization using a novel four arm PEG backbone. Coupling multiple RGD peptides to the PEG backbone increased the affinity of the vehicle for the cell surface, and that the PEG backbone did not reduce the affinity of RGD peptides for integrin receptors in both kinetic and equilibrium studies. Kinetic studies suggest that cellular internalization of PEG-based vehicles is not regulated by the RGD peptides on the vehicle, but rather by nonspecific interactions with heparan sulfate proteoglycans either alone or in combination with integrins. These results suggest that while increasing the number of RGD peptides per vehicle increases cell binding, but it does not contribute to increased internalization or transfection efficiency.