Attitudes and Perception of the REFLECT Communication Curriculum for Clinical Oncology Graduate Medical Education.

Communication and interpersonal skills are essential components of oncology patient care. The REFLECT (Respect, Empathy, Facilitate Effective Communication, Listen, Elicit Information, Compassion, and Teach Others) curriculum is a novel framework to improve and refine physician/patient interactions for oncology graduate medical trainees. We seek to evaluate the attitudes and perceptions of the REFLECT communication curriculum among oncology trainees. Seven-question and 8-question Likert scale surveys (1 = not beneficial and 5 = beneficial) were distributed to resident/fellow participants and faculty mentors, respectively. Questions asked trainees and faculty about their perceptions of improvement in communication, handling of stressful situations, the value of the curriculum, and overall impression of the curriculum. Descriptive statistics determined the survey's baseline characteristics and response rates. Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests were used to compare the distribution of continuous variables. Thirteen resident/fellow participants completed the participant survey. Six (43.6%) Radiation Oncology trainees and 7 (58.3%) Hematology/Oncology fellows completed the trainee survey. Eight (88.9%) Radiation Oncologists and 1 (11.1%) Medical Oncologist completed the observer survey. Faculty and trainees generally felt that the curriculum increased communication skills. Faculty responded more favorably to the program's impact on communication skills (median 5.0 vs. 4.0, p = 0.008). Faculty were more assertive about the curriculum's capabilities to improve a learner's ability to handle stressful situations (median 5.0 vs. 4.0, p = 0.003). Additionally, faculty had a more favorable overall impression of the REFLECT curriculum than the residents/fellows (median 5.0 vs. 4.0, p < 0.001). Radiation Oncology residents felt more strongly that the curriculum enhanced their ability to handle stressful topics, compared to Heme/Onc fellows (median 4.5 vs. 3.0, range 1-5, p = 0.379). Radiation Oncology trainees felt more consistently that the workshops improved their communication skills, compared to Heme/Onc fellows (median 4.5 vs. 3.5, range 1-5, p = 0.410). The overall impression between Rad Onc resident and Heme/Onc fellows was similar (median 4.0, p = 0.586). Conclusions: Overall, the REFLECT curriculum enhanced communication skills of trainees. Oncology trainees and faculty physicians feel that the curriculum was beneficial. As interactive skills and communication is critical to build positive interactions, further work is needed to improve the REFLECT curriculum.

Implementation of the REFLECT Communication Curriculum for Clinical Oncology Graduate Medical Education.

Background: Communication and interpersonal skills are essential medical components of oncology patient care. Patients and families rely on physicians for treatment, expertise, guidance, hope, meaning, and compassion throughout a life-threatening illness. A provider's inability to empathize with patients is linked to physician-related fatigue and burnout. Because oncology training programs focus on teaching evidence-based medicine and clinical acumen, little time may be dedicated to professional development and acquisition of interactive skills. Traditional communication courses typically include two components: formal, knowledge-based learning skills, which are gained from didactic lectures, and role-playing, which usually occurs in small groups. We report the implementation of a novel longitudinal communication curriculum for trainees in Oncology. Materials and Methods: At a single-center institution, an innovative communication curriculum titled "REFLECT" (Respect, Empathy, Facilitate Effective Communication, Listen, Elicit Information, Compassion, and Teach Others) was implemented for radiation oncology residents and medical oncology fellows to improve and refine physician/patient interactions. All oncology specialty residents and fellows were eligible to participate in this communication curriculum. The curriculum emphasized a reflective process to guide trainees through challenging scenarios. Results: Since October 2018, this comprehensive course consisted of quarterly (four hour) workshops comprising assigned reading, knowledge assessments, didactic lectures, expert guest lecturers, standardized patient simulations, role-playing, patient/expert panels, coaching, reflective writing, and debriefing/feedback sessions. The curriculum provided longitudinal communication training integrated with the learners' daily physician/patient encounters rather than occasional isolated experiences. Fifteen workshops have been completed. Each focused on navigating challenging situations with patients, loved ones, or colleagues. Conclusions: Future directions of the curriculum will entail improving the communication skills of oncology trainees and gathering communication improvement data to assess the program's success formally.