Academic Half-Day Education Experience in Post-graduate Medical Training: A Scoping Review of Characteristics and Learner Outcomes.

Background: The academic half-day (AHD) has grown in popularity for medical education because it intends to provide learners with uninterrupted, immersive learning time that may promote participant attendance, engagement, and knowledge. Little is known about the extent of use, forms, or effectiveness of AHD in Post-graduate medical education. This scoping review summarizes existing literature and describes the learning outcomes, according to the Kirkpatrick model of learning evaluation, of AHD experiences on Post-graduate medical trainees. Methods: Authors used Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework, searching electronic scientific literature databases from the years of 1977-2019 with relevant key terms and identifying 735 papers. Two independent raters completed title/abstract screening and then extracted pertinent data from papers meeting specified criteria. Results: Authors identified 38 relevant papers published in English, originating from programs in US (n = 19) and Canada (n = 19), spanning 4 disciplines: Medicine (n = 17, 45%), Pediatrics (n = 10, 26%), Critical Care/Surgery (n = 9, 24%), Radiology (n = 2, 5%). A majority (n = 33, 87%) described specific educational experiences; most focused on residents only (n = 27). The educational experiences included various teaching strategies; few were didactics only (n = 4) and most were multi-modal including simulation, case-based learning, problem-based learning, and/or self-directed online study. AHD size ranged from 5 to 364 participants (median 39). AHD length was 1.5-6 h (median 3). Required resources were inconsistently described. When evaluations of the specific educational experience were reported (n = 35 studies), the majority of studies used weak research designs (e.g., one group, pre/post-test, n = 19); few studies used strong research designs (e.g., randomized controlled trial, n = 2). Positive effects of AHD ranged across Kirkpatrick levels 1-3 learner outcomes. Conclusions: The composition and content of AHD in Post-graduate medical education vary. Few studies of AHD use stringent research designs, and none include learner outcome measures at the highest Kirkpatrick level (i.e., level 4 results/patient outcomes). A consensus definition and further high-quality research on AHD in Post-graduate medical education is needed.

Autism-Focused Online Training in Shared Decision-Making: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This medical education quasi-randomized controlled trial (quasi-RCT), involving 97 developmental-behavioral pediatrics fellows across the United States, examined differential effects of 2 autism-focused, online, interactive case-based trainings on shared decision-making (SDM). METHODS: An intervention case provided direct teaching about SDM, addressing autism treatment options. A comparison case focused on evidence-based practice (EBP) related to medication use in autism with no specific SDM teaching. Measured outcomes included self-reported SDM and attitudes toward concordance in medication-prescribing. RESULTS: After the intervention, both groups showed significantly increased SDM, but not medication-prescribing concordance (controlling for trainee level, autism patient numbers, and past SDM training). CONCLUSION: This quasi-RCT presents evidence that knowledge of SDM in care of children with autism can be enhanced by online case-based training focused either indirectly on evidence-based practice or directly on SDM. Consistent online SDM training can be provided to all trainees, irrespective of the location.

Parent Communication Prompt to Increase Shared Decision-Making: A New Intervention Approach.

OBJECTIVE: Shared decision-making (SDM) is the process by which patients, clinicians, and in pediatrics, parents/caregivers, discuss treatment options, communicate available evidence for or against the different options, share preferences and values, and eventually arrive at a joint decision. This study evaluates the use of a novel, universally applicable, SDM intervention, provided to parents, intended to promote engagement and participation with their child's clinician. METHODS: Two-arm randomized controlled trial comparing the impact of a SDM-focused intervention prompt to a neutral comparison prompt on perception of SDM participation. Participants included English-speaking parents of children (0-17 years) attending one Developmental-Behavioral Pediatric (DBP) clinic and their child's clinician. Prior to visit start, parents received either the intervention prompt encouraging engagement with the clinician in decision-making, or the comparison prompt reminding them to request a school/work excuse note if needed. After the visit, SDM was assessed by both parents and DBP clinicians. SDM was scored as present if the respondent answered "strongly agree" to all SDM-related items. Logistic regression tested effects of visit, child, parent, clinician characteristics, and intervention group status on parent-reported SDM. Cohen's kappa assessed alignment between parent and clinician perceptions of SDM. RESULTS: Of 88 parents screened, 50 (61%) met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate (intervention n = 26; comparison n = 24). Eligible participants (parents and clinicians) for analysis completed the surveys with no missing data. Overall, SDM was present in 76% of parents and 34% of clinicians. With high rates of parent-reported SDM in both intervention and comparison groups, no main intervention effect was detected. Compared to the comparison group, there was greater alignment between parent and clinician perception of SDM in the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: Parent and clinician enrollment and data collection with minimal loss suggest that this novel approach is easy to use and could be employed in future outpatient studies exploring SDM. In this clinical setting, both intervention and comparison group parents reported high levels of SDM participation and no main group effect was detected. Further study of this novel parent-directed SDM intervention approach is needed in a larger sample with greater variability in parent-reported SDM to determine its efficacy.

Parent-Reported Shared Decision Making: Autism Spectrum Disorder and Other Neurodevelopmental Disorders.

OBJECTIVES: Assess differences in parent-reported shared decision making (SDM) based on diagnostic group in a national sample of children with neurodevelopmental disorders (autism spectrum disorder [ASD], cerebral palsy [CP], or Down syndrome [DS]). Assess contribution of medical home and child functional impairment. METHODS: Secondary analysis of 2009 to 2010 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs explored reports of 3966 children with ASD, CP, or DS. SDM was defined categorically (SDMcat, present or absent) and continuously (SDMcont, score range 0-12). Regression models were adjusted for child/family characteristics, medical home, functional impairment, and diagnostic group. RESULTS: SDMcat and SDMcont were significantly lower in the ASD group (56.7% [95% confidence interval = CI, 53.4-59.9] and mean 8.7 [95% CI, 8.5-9.0]), compared with the CP group (70.5% [95% CI, 63.4-76.7] and mean 9.7 [95% CI, 9.3-10.1]), or the DS group (70.8% [95% CI, 61.2-78.8] and mean 10.0 [95% CI, 9.5-10.4]). In adjusted analyses of SDMcat and SDMcont, SDM was more likely among children with a medical home (adjusted odds ratio 6.6, p < .001, mean = 11.9, and p < .001), and less likely for children with greatest functional impairment (adjusted odds ratio 0.4, p = .002, mean = 10.1, and p = .001). Adjusted analysis of SDMcont also showed differences based on diagnostic group with lower SDMcont scores in the ASD group (mean = 10.1 and p = .005) compared with the DS group. CONCLUSION: A medical home was associated with higher SDM, whereas greater functional impairment and ASD diagnosis were associated with lower SDM.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 and children and youth with special health care needs.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was designed to (1) decrease the number of uninsured Americans, (2) make health insurance and health care affordable, and (3) improve health outcomes and performance of the health care system. During the design of ACA, children in general and children and youth with special health care needs and disabilities (CYSHCN) were not a priority because before ACA, a higher proportion of children than adults had insurance coverage through private family plans, Medicaid, or the State Children's Health Insurance Programs (CHIP). ACA benefits CYSHCN through provisions designed to make health insurance coverage universal and continuous, affordable, and adequate. Among the limitations of ACA for CYSHCN are the exemption of plans that had been in existence before ACA, lack of national standards for insurance benefits, possible elimination or reductions in funding for CHIP, and limited experience with new delivery models for improving care while reducing costs. Advocacy efforts on behalf of CYSHCN must track implementation of ACA at the federal and the state levels. Systems and payment reforms must emphasize access and quality improvements for CYSHCN over cost savings. Developmental-behavioral pediatrics must be represented at the policy level and in the design of new delivery models to assure high quality and cost-effective care for CYSHCN.