Impact of a coaching program on resident perceptions of communication confidence and feedback quality.

BACKGROUND: While communication is an essential skill for providing effective medical care, it is infrequently taught or directly assessed, limiting targeted feedback and behavior change. We sought to evaluate the impact of a multi-departmental longitudinal residency communication coaching program. We hypothesized that program implementation would result in improved confidence in residents' communication skills and higher-quality faculty feedback. METHODS: The program was implemented over a 3-year period (2019-2022) for surgery and neurology residents at a single institution. Trained faculty coaches met with assigned residents for coaching sessions. Each session included an observed clinical encounter, self-reflection, feedback, and goal setting. Eligible residents completed baseline and follow-up surveys regarding their perceptions of feedback and communication. Quantitative responses were analyzed using paired t-tests; qualitative responses were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: The baseline and follow-up survey response rates were 90.0% (126/140) and 50.5% (46/91), respectively. In a paired analysis of 40 respondents, residents reported greater confidence in their ability to communicate with patients (inpatient: 3.7 vs. 4.3, p < 0.001; outpatient: 3.5 vs. 4.2, p < 0.001), self-reflect (3.3 vs. 4.3, p < 0.001), and set goals (3.6 vs. 4.3, p < 0.001), as measured on a 5-point scale. Residents also reported greater usefulness of faculty feedback (3.3 vs. 4.2, p = 0.001). The content analysis revealed helpful elements of the program, challenges, and opportunities for improvement. Receiving mentorship, among others, was indicated as a core program strength, whereas solving session coordination and scheduling issues, as well as lowering the coach-resident ratio, were suggested as some of the improvement areas. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that direct observation of communication in clinical encounters by trained faculty coaches can facilitate long-term trainee growth across multiple core competencies. Future studies should evaluate the impact on patient outcomes and workplace-based assessments.

Developing a multi-departmental residency communication coaching program.

Background: Local needs assessments in our institution's surgery and neurology residency programs identified barriers to effective communication, such as no shared communication framework and limited feedback on nontechnical clinical skills. Residents identified faculty-led coaching as a desired educational intervention to improve communication skills. Three university departments (Surgery, Neurology, and Pediatrics) and health-care system leaders collaborated closely to develop an innovative communication coaching initiative generalizable to other residency programs. Innovation: Coaching program development involved several layers of collaboration between health-care system leaders, faculty educators, and departmental communication champions. The efforts included: (1) creating and delivering communication skills training to faculty and residents; (2) hosting frequent meetings among various stakeholders to develop program strategy, discuss opportunities and learnings, and engage other medical educators interested in coaching; (3) obtaining funding to implement the coaching initiative; (4) selecting coaches and providing salary and training support. Evaluation: A multi-phased mixed-methods study utilized online surveys and virtual semi-structured interviews to assess the program's quality and impact on the communication culture and the satisfaction and communication skills of residents. Quantitative and qualitative data have been integrated during data collection and analysis using embedding, building, and merging strategies. Discussion and Implications: Establishing a multi-departmental coaching program may be feasible and can be adapted by other programs if similar resources and focus are present. We found that stakeholders' buy-in, financial support, protected faculty time, flexible approach, and rigorous evaluation are crucial factors in successfully implementing and sustaining such an initiative.

National Pediatric Experience With Virtual Interviews: Lessons Learned and Future Recommendations.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic significantly impacted undergraduate and graduate medical education and created challenges that prevented a traditional approach to residency and fellowship recruitment and interviews. Early in the pandemic, the pediatric education community came together to support applicants and training programs and to foster an equitable recruitment process. We describe many of our community's innovations, including the use of virtual cafés to educate programs and highlight best practices for virtual recruitment and the use of regional webinars to highlight residency programs and provide information to applicants. Surveys of applicants and programs suggest that the virtual interview process worked well overall, with applicants and programs saving both time and money and programs maintaining a high rate of filling their positions. On the basis of this experience, we highlight the strengths and weaknesses of 3 potential models for future interview seasons. We close with a series of questions that need further investigation to create an effective and equitable recruitment process for the future.

Perspectives from the Society for Pediatric Research: advice on sustaining science and mentoring during COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic will leave an indelible mark on the careers of current medical trainees. Given the disruptions to medical education, economic impact on institutions, and the uncertainties around future job prospects, trainees are facing unprecedented challenges. This situation is especially concerning for futures of pediatric physician-scientist trainees, where concerns regarding maintaining the pipeline were well documented prior to the emergence of COVID-19. In this Perspectives article, we leverage the unique expertise of our workgroup to address concerns of physician-scientist trainees and to provide suggestions on how to navigate career trajectories in the post-COVID-19 era. We identified and addressed four major areas of concern: lack of in-person conferences and the associated decrease access to mentors and networking activities, decreased academic productivity, diminished job prospects, and mental health challenges. We also suggest actions for trainees, mentors and educational leaders, and institutions to help support trainees during the pandemic, with a goal of maintaining the pediatric physician-scientist pipeline.

Categorical Pediatric Residency Program Curriculum Needs: A Study of Graduating Residents and Residency Program Leadership.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric residency programs must adapt their curriculum to meet evolving patient needs yet face limited resources to implement changes resulting in gaps. We performed a categorical pediatric residency program curriculum needs assessment to inform curriculum development efforts. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2017 American Academy of Pediatrics Annual Survey of Graduating Residents and pediatric program and associate program director polls conducted at a 2019 pediatric residency program director national meeting. We used conventional content analysis to code and categorize. RESULTS: Participants included 528 (53%) graduating residents representing 88% of programs, 89 program directors, and 177 associate program directors representing at minimum 45% of programs. Participants demonstrated concordance on the top 4 needs-additional clinical experiences, career development, business of medicine, and health systems. Program leaders also identified wellness and resiliency; disparities; diversity, equity, and inclusion; and communication. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first categorical pediatric program general curriculum needs assessment conducted of pediatric leadership and graduating residents in over a decade. While program leadership and resident data were collected 2 years apart, we found concordance on the top 4 categories and consistency with prior national needs assessments with the exception of career development. New curriculum development efforts are underway.

Righting the Autonomy-Supervision Pendulum: Understanding the Impact of Independent Rounds on Medical Students, Residents, and Faculty.

PURPOSE: To explore trainee and faculty perspectives on an independent rounding intervention on general pediatrics wards at 2 institutions. METHOD: In July 2018, the authors introduced independent rounds 1 to 2 times a week at 2 training sites. In this qualitative study, the authors conducted semistructured focus groups with a purposive sample of junior trainees (clerkship medical students and postgraduate year [PGY] 1 residents), senior trainees (PGY-2 and PGY 3-5 residents), and hospital medicine faculty between October 2018 and May 2019. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for themes using the constant comparative approach associated with grounded theory. RESULTS: Focus groups included 27 junior trainees, 20 senior trainees, and 18 faculty. Six themes emerged: (1) Independent rounds contributed to all trainees' development; (2) Senior residents described increased motivation to take full ownership of their patients and educational needs of the team; (3) Faculty expressed concerns about decreased opportunities for teaching and feedback; however, all trainees reported unique learning from having faculty both present and absent from rounds; (4) No significant patient safety events were reported; (5) All participants identified communication and patient progression concerns; and (6) A tension emerged between decreased faculty and enhanced trainee career satisfaction. Participants identified solutions to identified barriers to further improve this educational intervention. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of independent rounding, trainees described increased motivation to take ownership of their patients and team. Both rounding experiences contributed to their development as physicians in different ways. Further studies should explore patient and caregiver perspectives and concerns about communication and patient care progression when designing future interventions to promote resident autonomy.

The Effect of Faculty Coaching on Resident Attitudes, Confidence, and Patient-Rated Communication: A Multi-Institutional Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Despite a national focus on physician-patient communication, there is a paucity of literature on how patient and family feedback (PFF) can be used as a tool to help residents learn communication skills. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of coaching on residents' attitudes towards PFF, self-confidence in communication, and patient-rated communication skills. METHODS: This was an institutional review board-approved, randomized-controlled trial with pediatric residents at 3 institutions from 2015 to 2016. Pre- and postintervention, residents completed a self-assessment of their attitudes and self-confidence in communication. PFF was collected for each resident using the Communication Assessment Tool, which has been validated in other medical disciplines. Intervention group residents reviewed their baseline PFF with a faculty coach; control group residents reviewed their PFF independently. RESULTS: In total, 114 residents completed the study, 57 in each arm. Intervention group residents were significantly more likely to ask for PFF compared with control group residents (mean change 0.36 vs -0.11, P = .01). There were no other significant differences in resident attitudes, confidence, or patient-rated communication between groups. Both groups had increased self-confidence over time and with increasing postgraduate year level. Patient ratings of resident communication did not differ over time or between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Residents who reviewed PFF with a faculty coach were significantly more likely to report they would ask patients for feedback than residents who reviewed PFF independently, suggesting review of feedback with a coach may enhance appreciation of patient feedback. Although self-confidence improved over time in both groups, patient ratings of resident communication skills were not significantly different over time or between groups.

De-escalating Angry Caregivers: A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Novel Communication Curriculum for Pediatric Residents.

OBJECTIVE: Medical providers struggle when communicating with angry patients and their caregivers. Pediatric residents perceive communication competencies as an important priority for learning, yet they lack confidence and desire more training in communicating with angry families. Few curricula exist to support trainees with de-escalation skill development. We developed, implemented, and evaluated the impact of a novel de-escalation curriculum on pediatric resident communication skills. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of a 90-minute de-escalation curriculum for pediatric residents from August to September 2016. Trained standardized patient (SP) actors rated residents' communication skills following 2 unique encounters before and after the intervention or control sessions. Residents completed a retrospective pre/post communication skills self-assessment and curriculum evaluation. We used independent and paired t-tests to assess for communication improvements. RESULTS: Eighty-four of 88 (95%) eligible residents participated (43 intervention, 41 control). Residents reported frequent encounters with angry caregivers. At baseline, interns had significantly lower mean SP-rated de-escalation skills than other residents (P = .03). Intervention residents did not improve significantly more than controls on their pre/post change in mean SP-rated de-escalation skills; however, intervention residents improved significantly on their pre/post mean self-assessed de-escalation skills (P ≤ .03). CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant self-assessed improvements, residents' SP-rated de-escalation skills did not improve following a skills-based intervention. Nevertheless, our study illustrates the need for de-escalation curricula focused on strategies and peer discussion, suggests optimal timing of delivery during fall of intern year, and offers an assessment tool for exploration in future studies.

Patient safety after implementation of a coproduced family centered communication programme: multicenter before and after intervention study

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether medical errors, family experience, and communication processes improved after implementation of an intervention to standardize the structure of healthcare provider-family communication on family centered rounds. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter before and after intervention study. SETTING: Pediatric inpatient units in seven North American hospitals, 17 December 2014 to 3 January 2017. PARTICIPANTS: All patients admitted to study units (3106 admissions, 13171 patient days); 2148 parents or caregivers, 435 nurses, 203 medical students, and 586 residents. INTERVENTION: Families, nurses, and physicians coproduced an intervention to standardize healthcare provider-family communication on ward rounds ("family centered rounds"), which included structured, high reliability communication on bedside rounds emphasizing health literacy, family engagement, and bidirectional communication; structured, written real-time summaries of rounds; a formal training programme for healthcare providers; and strategies to support teamwork, implementation, and process improvement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Medical errors (primary outcome), including harmful errors (preventable adverse events) and non-harmful errors, modeled using Poisson regression and generalized estimating equations clustered by site; family experience; and communication processes (eg, family engagement on rounds). Errors were measured via an established systematic surveillance methodology including family safety reporting. RESULTS: The overall rate of medical errors (per 1000 patient days) was unchanged (41.2 (95% confidence interval 31.2 to 54.5) pre-intervention v 35.8 (26.9 to 47.7) post-intervention, P=0.21), but harmful errors (preventable adverse events) decreased by 37.9% (20.7 (15.3 to 28.1) v 12.9 (8.9 to 18.6), P=0.01) post-intervention. Non-preventable adverse events also decreased (12.6 (8.9 to 17.9) v 5.2 (3.1 to 8.8), P=0.003). Top box (eg, "excellent") ratings for six of 25 components of family reported experience improved; none worsened. Family centered rounds occurred more frequently (72.2% (53.5% to 85.4%) v 82.8% (64.9% to 92.6%), P=0.02). Family engagement 55.6% (32.9% to 76.2%) v 66.7% (43.0% to 84.1%), P=0.04) and nurse engagement (20.4% (7.0% to 46.6%) v 35.5% (17.0% to 59.6%), P=0.03) on rounds improved. Families expressing concerns at the start of rounds (18.2% (5.6% to 45.3%) v 37.7% (17.6% to 63.3%), P=0.03) and reading back plans (4.7% (0.7% to 25.2%) v 26.5% (12.7% to 7.3%), P=0.02) increased. Trainee teaching and the duration of rounds did not change significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall errors were unchanged, harmful medical errors decreased and family experience and communication processes improved after implementation of a structured communication intervention for family centered rounds coproduced by families, nurses, and physicians. Family centered care processes may improve safety and quality of care without negatively impacting teaching or duration of rounds. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02320175.

Resident Experiences With Implementation of the I-PASS Handoff Bundle.

BACKGROUND: The I-PASS Handoff Study found that introduction of a handoff bundle (handoff and teamwork training for residents, a mnemonic, a handoff tool, a faculty development program, and a sustainability campaign) at 9 pediatrics residency programs was associated with improved communication and patient safety. OBJECTIVE: This parallel qualitative study aimed to understand resident experiences with I-PASS and to inform future implementation and sustainability strategies. METHODS: Resident experiences with I-PASS were explored in focus groups (N = 50 residents) at 8 hospitals throughout 2012-2013. A content analysis of transcripts was conducted following the principles of grounded theory. RESULTS: Residents generally accepted I-PASS as an ideal format for handoffs, and valued learning a structured approach. Across all sites, residents reported full adherence to I-PASS when observed, but selective adherence in usual practice. Residents adhered more closely when patients were complex, teams were unfamiliar, and during evening handoff. Residents reported using elements of the I-PASS mnemonic variably, with Illness Severity and Action Items most consistently used, but Synthesis by Receiver least used, except when observed. Most residents were receptive to the electronic handoff tool, but perceptions about usability varied across sites. Experiences with observation and feedback were mixed. Concern about efficiency commonly influenced attitudes about I-PASS. CONCLUSIONS: Residents generally supported I-PASS implementation, but adherence was influenced by patient type, context, and individual and team factors. Our findings could inform future implementation, particularly around the areas of resident engagement in change, sensitivity to resident level, perceived efficiency, and faculty observation.

Families as Partners in Hospital Error and Adverse Event Surveillance.

Importance: Medical errors and adverse events (AEs) are common among hospitalized children. While clinician reports are the foundation of operational hospital safety surveillance and a key component of multifaceted research surveillance, patient and family reports are not routinely gathered. We hypothesized that a novel family-reporting mechanism would improve incident detection. Objective: To compare error and AE rates (1) gathered systematically with vs without family reporting, (2) reported by families vs clinicians, and (3) reported by families vs hospital incident reports. Design, Setting, and Participants: We conducted a prospective cohort study including the parents/caregivers of 989 hospitalized patients 17 years and younger (total 3902 patient-days) and their clinicians from December 2014 to July 2015 in 4 US pediatric centers. Clinician abstractors identified potential errors and AEs by reviewing medical records, hospital incident reports, and clinician reports as well as weekly and discharge Family Safety Interviews (FSIs). Two physicians reviewed and independently categorized all incidents, rating severity and preventability (agreement, 68%-90%; κ, 0.50-0.68). Discordant categorizations were reconciled. Rates were generated using Poisson regression estimated via generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures on the same patient. Main Outcomes and Measures: Error and AE rates. Results: Overall, 746 parents/caregivers consented for the study. Of these, 717 completed FSIs. Their median (interquartile range) age was 32.5 (26-40) years; 380 (53.0%) were nonwhite, 566 (78.9%) were female, 603 (84.1%) were English speaking, and 380 (53.0%) had attended college. Of 717 parents/caregivers completing FSIs, 185 (25.8%) reported a total of 255 incidents, which were classified as 132 safety concerns (51.8%), 102 nonsafety-related quality concerns (40.0%), and 21 other concerns (8.2%). These included 22 preventable AEs (8.6%), 17 nonharmful medical errors (6.7%), and 11 nonpreventable AEs (4.3%) on the study unit. In total, 179 errors and 113 AEs were identified from all sources. Family reports included 8 otherwise unidentified AEs, including 7 preventable AEs. Error rates with family reporting (45.9 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.2-fold (95% CI, 1.1-1.2) higher than rates without family reporting (39.7 per 1000 patient-days). Adverse event rates with family reporting (28.7 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.1-fold (95% CI, 1.0-1.2; P = .006) higher than rates without (26.1 per 1000 patient-days). Families and clinicians reported similar rates of errors (10.0 vs 12.8 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 0.8; 95% CI, .5-1.2) and AEs (8.5 vs 6.2 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.2). Family-reported error rates were 5.0-fold (95% CI, 1.9-13.0) higher and AE rates 2.9-fold (95% CI, 1.2-6.7) higher than hospital incident report rates. Conclusions and Relevance: Families provide unique information about hospital safety and should be included in hospital safety surveillance in order to facilitate better design and assessment of interventions to improve safety.

The Discriminatory Patient and Family: Strategies to Address Discrimination Towards Trainees.

PURPOSE: Trainee mistreatment remains an important and serious medical education issue. Mistreatment toward trainees by the medical team has been described; mistreatment by patients and families has not. Motivated by discrimination towards a resident by a family in their emergency department, the authors sought to identify strategies for trainees and physicians to respond effectively to mistreatment by patients and families. METHOD: A purposeful sample of pediatric faculty educational leaders was recruited from April-June 2014 at Stanford University. Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, semistructured one-on-one interviews were conducted. Participants were asked to describe how they would respond to clinical scenarios of families discriminating against trainees (involving race, gender, and religion). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and anonymized. The authors analyzed interview transcripts using constant comparative analysis and performed post hoc member checking. This project was IRB approved. RESULTS: Four themes emerged from interviews with 13 faculty: assess illness acuity, cultivate a therapeutic alliance, depersonalize the event, and ensure a safe learning environment. Participants wanted trainees to feel empowered to remove themselves from care when necessary but acknowledged that removal was not always possible or easy. Nearly all participants agreed that trainee and faculty development was needed. Suggested educational strategies included team debriefing and critical reflection. CONCLUSIONS: Discrimination towards trainees by patients and families is an important issue. As this type of mistreatment cannot be fully prevented, effective preparation is essential. Effective response strategies exist and can be taught to trainees to empower responses that protect learners and preserve patient care.

Caring for Children With Medical Complexity: Challenges and Educational Opportunities Identified by Pediatric Residents.

OBJECTIVE: High-quality care for children with medical complexity (CMC) is in its infancy. Residents have the opportunity to view care for CMC with a fresh perspective that is informed by their work across diverse health care settings and significant time spent at the bedside. This study aimed to identify the challenges and potential solutions for complex care delivery and education from their perspectives. METHODS: We conducted three 60-minute focus groups with a purposeful sample of residents and recent graduates at a US tertiary-care medical center. Data were transcribed verbatim, and themes were identified using an iterative approach and modified grounded theory. RESULTS: Sixteen participants identified 4 major challenges to caring for CMC: 1) lack of care coordination; 2) complex technology management; 3) patients' pervasive psychosocial needs; and 4) lack of effective health care provider training. Participants identified 3 solutions: 1) greater integration of primary care providers; 2) attention to psychosocial needs through shared decision making; and 3) integration of longitudinal patient relationships into provider training. We found that residents who experienced longitudinal relationships with CMC felt more efficacious and better equipped to handle challenges of caring for CMC as a result of their broader understanding of patients' priorities and of their role as providers. CONCLUSIONS: Residents recognize important challenges and offer thoughtful solutions to caring for CMC. Although multiple solutions exist, formal integration of longitudinal patient experiences into residency training may better prepare residents to understand patient priorities and identify when their own attitudinal changes can guide them into more efficacious roles as providers.

Outcomes of a randomized controlled educational intervention to train pediatric residents on caring for children with special health care needs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an innovative curriculum meeting new pediatric residency education guidelines, Special Care Optimization for Patients and Education (SCOPE). METHODS: Residents were randomized to intervention (n = 23) or control (n = 25) groups. Intervention residents participated in SCOPE, pairing them with a child with special health care needs (CSHCN) and faculty mentor to make a home visit, complete care coordination toolkits, and participate in case discussions. The primary outcome was resident self-efficacy in nine skills in caring for CSHCN. Secondary outcomes included curriculum feasibility/acceptance, resident attitudes, and family satisfaction. RESULTS: Response rates were ≥65%. Intervention residents improved in their self-efficacy for setting patient-centered goals compared with controls (mean change on 4-point Likert-type scale, 1.36 vs 0.56, P < .05). SCOPE was feasible/acceptable, residents had improved attitudes toward CSHCN, and families reported high satisfaction. CONCLUSION: SCOPE may serve as a model for efforts to increase residents' self-efficacy in their care of patients with chronic disease.

Continuing education needs of pediatricians across diverse specialties caring for children with medical complexity.

OBJECTIVE: Care for children with medical complexity (CMC) relies on pediatricians who often are ill equipped, but striving to provide high quality care. We performed a needs assessment of pediatricians across diverse subspecialties at a tertiary academic US children's hospital about their continuing education needs regarding the care of CMC. METHODS: Eighteen pediatricians from diverse subspecialties were asked to complete an online anonymous open-ended survey. Data were analyzed using modified grounded theory. RESULTS: The response rate was 89% (n = 16). Of participants, 31.2% (n = 5) were general pediatricians, 18.7% (n = 3) were hospitalists, and 50% (n = 8) were pediatric subspecialists. Pediatricians recognized the need for skills in care coordination, giving bad news, working in interprofessional teams, and setting goals of care with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Practicing pediatricians need skills to improve care for CMC. Strategically incorporating basic palliative care education may fill an important training need across diverse pediatric specialties.

Changes in medical errors after implementation of a handoff program.

BACKGROUND: Miscommunications are a leading cause of serious medical errors. Data from multicenter studies assessing programs designed to improve handoff of information about patient care are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a prospective intervention study of a resident handoff-improvement program in nine hospitals, measuring rates of medical errors, preventable adverse events, and miscommunications, as well as resident workflow. The intervention included a mnemonic to standardize oral and written handoffs, handoff and communication training, a faculty development and observation program, and a sustainability campaign. Error rates were measured through active surveillance. Handoffs were assessed by means of evaluation of printed handoff documents and audio recordings. Workflow was assessed through time-motion observations. The primary outcome had two components: medical errors and preventable adverse events. RESULTS: In 10,740 patient admissions, the medical-error rate decreased by 23% from the preintervention period to the postintervention period (24.5 vs. 18.8 per 100 admissions, P<0.001), and the rate of preventable adverse events decreased by 30% (4.7 vs. 3.3 events per 100 admissions, P<0.001). The rate of nonpreventable adverse events did not change significantly (3.0 and 2.8 events per 100 admissions, P=0.79). Site-level analyses showed significant error reductions at six of nine sites. Across sites, significant increases were observed in the inclusion of all prespecified key elements in written documents and oral communication during handoff (nine written and five oral elements; P<0.001 for all 14 comparisons). There were no significant changes from the preintervention period to the postintervention period in the duration of oral handoffs (2.4 and 2.5 minutes per patient, respectively; P=0.55) or in resident workflow, including patient-family contact and computer time. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the handoff program was associated with reductions in medical errors and in preventable adverse events and with improvements in communication, without a negative effect on workflow. (Funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and others.).