Exploring the benefits of an optional theatre module on medical student well-being.

BACKGROUND: Medical students struggle with varied stressors and developing adequate coping mechanisms is essential. PURPOSE: This study examined medical student perceptions of the well-being impact of a theatre-based course. METHODS: Eighteen 1st-year medical students at the University of Alberta participated in 3 focus groups following the conclusion of a theatre-based module that was piloted in the first quarter of 2010. A semistructured protocol was used to guide the focus groups, which were audiotaped and transcribed. Along with general feedback, impact on personal development and student well-being were discussed. Thematic aspects of these discussions were qualitatively analyzed. FINDINGS: During the focus groups, medical students identified three aspects of the theatre-based module that contributed to their sense of overall well-being. These included (a) fun/relaxation, (b) enhanced relationships with each other, and (c) personal growth/resilience. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that participating in an optional theatre module can enhance medical student well-being. Our analysis suggests the need to consider novel, humanities-based curriculum offerings in relation to personal development and well- being.

A tale of two cultures: specialists and generalists sharing the load.

OBJECTIVE: To understand what contributes to good collaborative physician working relationships through identifying the factors that affect working relationships between generalist physicians and specialists. DESIGN: Qualitative study using in-depth interviews. SETTING: University and community hospital inpatient family practice settings in Edmonton, Alta. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven physicians from various specialties who graduated between 1977 and 2001. METHODS: A grounded-theory approach, including constant comparison and creation of memorandums, helped to conceptualize the main concern and generated a framework for how the main concern was being resolved. A semistructured interview guide was developed and individual, in-depth interviews were audiotaped. Purposeful and theoretical sampling techniques were used. Three researchers participated in the analysis. MAIN FINDINGS: The findings suggested that when generalist physicians perceived that work had been imposed on them by specialists without negotiation, they felt overwhelmed by the workload. Differing priorities determined whether physicians were left holding the bag or sharing the load. In a system that valued technology and specialized knowledge and skills, the specialists were better able to control resources, set boundaries, and influence learners. This precipitated a culture of protecting valuable specialty resources, increasing physician isolation, and generalists feeling that they were left holding the bag. In order to reverse this cycle, it was important for physicians to develop good working relationships based on accessibility to needed expertise and tests, with negotiated agreements on how to share resources; mutual empowerment, including negotiation of roles and responsibilities to develop flexible relationships with a clear understanding of roles; and concern for fairness by sharing the load. CONCLUSION: Medical systems that value technology and focused interests might lead to someone being left holding the bag, contributing to generalists feeling overwhelmed and isolated within the system. A comprehensive system that values relationships might help to resolve issues created through perceived inequities in workload, disempowerment, and lack of understanding of roles.

The Role of Patient Advisory Councils in Health Research: Lessons From Two Provincial Councils in Canada.

This article describes two patient advisory councils (PACs) in Canada in order to contribute to the limited evidence base on how they might facilitate patient engagement in health research. Specifically, members of PACs from Newfoundland and Labrador and Alberta describe their councils' governance structure, primary functions, creation and composition, and recount specific research-related activities with which they have been involved. Key challenges of these councils and facilitators of their use are also presented. Finally, members from both councils recount lessons learned and offer suggestions for others interested in advisory councils as a mechanism for patient engagement in any health research project. Members believe patient engagement can result in better quality research and encourage decision makers and researchers to utilize patients' valuable input to inform health system changes and drive priorities at a policy level.

Evidence available for patient-identified priorities in depression research: results of 11 rapid responses.

OBJECTIVES: Patient priority setting projects (PPSPs) can reduce research agenda bias. A key element of PPSPs is a review of available literature to determine if the proposed research priorities have been addressed, identify research gaps, recognise opportunities for knowledge translation (KT) and avoid duplication of research efforts. We conducted rapid responses for 11 patient-identified priorities in depression to provide a map of the existing evidence. DESIGN: Eleven rapid responses. DATA SOURCES: Single electronic database (PubMed). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Each rapid response had unique eligibility criteria. For study designs, we used a stepwise inclusion process that started with systematic reviews (SRs) if available, then randomised controlled trials and observational studies as necessary. RESULTS: For all but one of the rapid responses we identified existing SRs (median 7 SRs per rapid response, range 0-179). There were questions where extensive evidence exists (ie, hundreds of primary studies), yet uncertainties remain. For example, there is evidence supporting the effectiveness of many non-pharmacological interventions (including psychological interventions and exercise) to reduce depressive symptoms. However, targeted research is needed that addresses comparative effectiveness of promising interventions, specific populations of interest (eg, children, minority groups) and adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: We identified an extensive body of evidence addressing patient priorities in depression and mapped the results and limitations of existing evidence, areas of uncertainty and general directions for future research. This work can serve as a solid foundation to guide future research in depression and KT activities. Integrated knowledge syntheses bring value to the PPSP process; however, the role of knowledge synthesis in PPSPs and methodological approaches are not well defined at present.

The top research questions asked by people with lived depression experience in Alberta: a survey.

BACKGROUND: To support patient-oriented setting of priorities for depression research in Alberta, the Patient Engagement Platform of the Alberta Strategy for Patient Oriented Research's Support for People and Patient-Oriented Research and Trials Unit and Alberta Health Services' Addiction and Mental Health Strategic Clinical Network, along with partners in addictions and mental health, designed the Alberta Depression Research Priority Setting Project. The aim of the project was to survey patients, caregivers and clinicians/researchers in Alberta about what they considered to be the most important unanswered questions about depression. METHODS: The project adapted the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership method into a 6-step process to gather and prioritize questions about depression posed by people with lived depression experience, which included patients, caregivers, clinicians and health care practitioners. RESULTS: Implementation of the project, from initial data collection to final priority setting, took 10 months (August 2016 to June 2017). A total of 445 Albertans with lived experience of depression participated, ultimately identifying 11 priority depression research questions spanning the health continuum, life stages, and treatment and prevention opportunities. INTERPRETATION: This project is a fundamental step that has the potential to positively influence depression research. Including the voices of Albertans with lived experience will create advantages for depression research for Albertans, researchers and research funders, and for patient engagement in the research enterprise overall.

People with lived experience (PWLE) of depression: describing and reflecting on an explicit patient engagement process within depression research priority setting in Alberta, Canada.

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY: The Alberta Depression Research Priority Setting Project aimed to meaningfully involve patients, families and clinicians in determining a research agenda aligned to the needs of Albertans who have experienced depression. The project was modeled after a process developed in the UK by the James Lind Alliance and adapted to fit the Alberta, Canada context. This study describes the processes used to ensure the voices of people with lived experience of depression were integrated throughout the project stages. The year long project culminated with a facilitated session to identify the top essential areas of depression research focus. People with lived experience were engaged as part of the project's Steering Committee, as survey participants and as workshop participants. It is hoped this process will guide future priority setting opportunities and advance depression research in Alberta. ABSTRACT: Background The Depression Research Priority Setting (DRPS) project has the clear aim of describing the patient engagement process used to identify depression research priorities and to reflect on the successes of this engagement approach, positive impacts and opportunities for improvement. To help support patient-oriented depression research priority setting in Alberta, the Patient Engagement (PE) Platform of the Alberta Strategy for Patient Oriented Research Support for People and Patient-Oriented Research and Trials (SUPPORT) Unit designed, along with the support of their partners in addictions and mental health, an explit process to engage patients in the design and execution of the DRPS. Methods The UK's James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) method was adapted into a six step process to ensure voices of "people with lived experience" (PWLE) with depression were included throughout the project stages. This study uses an explicit and parallel patient engagement process throughout each estage of the PSP designed by the PE Platform. Patient engagement was divided into a five step process: i) Awareness and relationship building; ii) Co-designing and co-developing a shared decision making process; iii) Collaborative communication; iv) Collective sensemaking; and v) Acknowledgement, celebration and recognition. A formative evaluation of the six PE processes was undertaken to explore the success of the parallel patient engagement process. Results This project was successful in engaging people with lived depression experience as partners in research priority setting, incorporating their voices into the discussions and decisions that led to the top 25 depression research questions. Conclusions The DRPS project has positively contributed to depression research in Canada by identifying the priorities of Albertans who have experienced depression for depression research. Dissemination activities to promote further knowledge exchange of prioritized research questions, with emphasis on the importance of process in engaging the voices of PWLE of depression are planned.