Educational Formats and Content Domains of Interprofessional Education for Licensed Rehabilitation Professionals: Scoping Review.

Background: Interprofessional education (IPE) is a key strategy for enhancing collaboration and patient safety. While evidence for student populations is abundant, studies focusing on licensed physical therapists (PTs), occupational therapists (OTs), and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) remain limited. In contemporary rehabilitation practice, continuous IPE is increasingly important to address professional burnout and the growing complexity of patient needs. Objective: This scoping review aimed to systematically map and synthesize the educational formats, content domains, and reported outcomes of IPE programs specifically targeting licensed PTs, OTs, and SLPs. Methods: Following Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, we searched the PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Educational Resources Information Center databases through December 31, 2025. The eligibility criteria were based on the population, concept, and context framework, including peer-reviewed, English-language studies of licensed PTs, OTs, and SLPs (population) participating in structured IPE interventions (concept) within clinical or community settings (context). Studies focusing solely on students or prelicensure trainees were excluded. Following the screening of 3234 records by independent pairs of reviewers, 9 studies were ultimately selected for inclusion. Methodological quality was appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklists and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data were synthesized using an evidence gap map to visualize research density across domains relative to established competency frameworks. Results: A total of 9 studies from Australia, the United States, Canada, and the Philippines were included, with sample sizes ranging from 8 to 197. Most used single-group pre-post or mixed methods designs; notably, no randomized controlled trials were identified. Methodological quality was generally high, though limited by the lack of control groups. Systematic mapping identified 7 educational formats, with lectures and discussions being the most dominant across all competency domains. Primary content domains included communication and role clarification. Specific successful interventions included pharmacist-led medication safety workshops and the Kawa model for team building. While participants reported immediate improvements in role understanding and collaborative confidence, simulation-based training showed inconsistent effects on long-term clinical behavior. A substantial evidence gap was identified in experiential learning approaches targeting collaborative leadership. Conclusions: This scoping review adds a novel perspective by focusing exclusively on licensed rehabilitation professionals (PTs, OTs, and SLPs), highlighting learning needs distinct from those of prelicensure students. It brings to the field a clearer understanding of a potential "leadership gap" and the current overreliance on didactic methods for experienced clinicians. Real-world implications suggest the need for health care institutions to transition toward systematic, practice-integrated IPE models that incorporate objective behavioral assessments. By addressing identified gaps in collaborative leadership and team functioning through longitudinal programs, health care institutions may contribute to more resilient team cultures, ultimately improving patient safety and the quality of rehabilitation care.