A step-by-step guide for mentors to facilitate team building and communication in virtual teams.

As collaborative work in medical education has increasingly moved online, team mentors have had to adapt their practices into the virtual environment. Fostering connection, communication and productivity on virtual teams requires specific skills and deliberate practice that differ from in-person teamwork. Drawing from best practices in business, education and medicine and also from our own experience as a virtual team, we present a guide for mentors to create and sustain successful virtual teams. Grounded in Tuckman's Five Stage Model of Team Development, we offer specific strategies for virtual team mentors to promote team cohesion, mitigate conflict, maintain productivity and leverage the benefits of the virtual environment.

Standardized Vaccine-Hesitant Patients in the Assessment of the Effectiveness of Vaccine Communication Training.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if training residents in a structured communication method elicits specific behaviors in a laboratory model of interaction with vaccine-hesitant parents. STUDY DESIGN: Standardized patients portraying vaccine-hesitant parents were used to assess the effectiveness of training in the Announce, Inquire, Mirror, Secure (AIMS) Method for Healthy Conversations. Blinded pediatric residents were pseudorandomized to receive AIMS or control training and underwent pre- and post-training encounters with blinded standardized patients. Encounters were assessed by blinded raters using a novel tool. Participant confidence and standardized patient evaluations of the participants' general communication skills were assessed. RESULTS: Ratings were available for 27 AIMS and 26 control participants. Statistically significant increases in post-training scores (maximum = 30) were detected in AIMS, but not in control, participants (median, 21.3 [IQR, 19.8-24.8] vs 18.8 [IQR, 16.9-20.9]; P < .001). Elements (maximum score = 6) with significant increases were Inquire (0.67 [IQR, 0-1.76] vs -0.33 [IQR, -0.67 to 0.33]; P < .001); Mirror (1.33 [IQR, 0 to 2] vs -0.33 [IQR, -0.92 to 0]; P < .001) and Secure (0.33 [IQR, 0 to 1.67] vs -0.17 [IQR, -0.67 to 0.33]; P = .017). Self-confidence increased equally in both groups. Standardized patients did not detect a difference in communication skills after training and between groups. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the assessment tool were modest. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized patients proved useful in studying the effectiveness of structured communication training, but may have been limited in their ability to perceive a difference between groups owing to the predetermined encounter outcome of vaccine refusal. AIMS training should be studied in real-world scenarios to determine if it impacts vaccine acceptance.