Design and rationale of the medical students learning weight management counseling skills (MSWeight) group randomized controlled trial.

Physicians have an important role addressing the obesity epidemic. Lack of adequate teaching to provide weight management counseling (WMC) is cited as a reason for limited treatment. National guidelines have not been translated into an evidence-supported, competency-based curriculum in medical schools. Weight Management Counseling in Medical Schools: A Randomized Controlled Trial (MSWeight) is designed to determine if a multi-modal theoretically-guided WMC educational intervention improves observed counseling skills and secondarily improve perceived skills and self-efficacy among medical students compared to traditional education (TE). Eight U.S. medical schools were pair-matched and randomized in a group randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether a multi-modal education (MME) intervention compared to traditional education (TE) improves observed WMC skills. The MME intervention includes innovative components in years 1-3: a structured web-course; a role play exercise, WebPatientEncounter, and an enhanced outpatient internal medicine or family medicine clerkship. This evidence-supported curriculum uses the 5As framework to guide treatment and incorporates patient-centered counseling to engage the patient. The primary outcome is a comparison of scores on an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) WMC case among third year medical students. The secondary outcome compares changes in scores of medical students from their first to third year on an assessment of perceived WMC skills and self-efficacy. MSWeight is the first RCT in medical schools to evaluate whether interventions integrated into the curriculum improve medical students' WMC skills. If this educational approach for teaching WMC is effective, feasible and acceptable it can affect how medical schools integrate WMC teaching into their curriculum.

Do we pay our community preceptors? Results from a CERA clerkship directors' survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family medicine clerkships depend heavily on community-based family physician preceptors to teach medical students. These preceptors have traditionally been unpaid, but in recent years some clerkships have started to pay preceptors. This study determines trends in the number and geographic region of programs that pay their community preceptors, identifies reasons programs pay or do not pay, and investigates perceived advantages and disadvantages of payment. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, electronic survey of 134 family medicine clerkship directors at allopathic US medical schools. RESULTS: The response rate was 62% (83/132 clerkship directors). Nineteen of these (23%) currently pay community preceptors, 11 of whom are located in either New England or the South Atlantic region. Sixty-three percent of programs who pay report that their community preceptors are also paid for teaching other learners, compared to 32% of those programs who do not pay. Paying respondents displayed more positive attitudes toward paying community preceptors, though a majority of non-paying respondents indicated they would pay if they had the financial resources. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of clerkships do not pay their community preceptors to teach medical students, but competition from other learners may drive more medical schools to consider payment to help with preceptor recruitment and retention. Medical schools located in regions where there is competition for community preceptors from other medical and non-medical schools may need to consider paying preceptors as part of recruitment and retention efforts.

Geriatric palliative care: do medical students' narrative reflections after a hospice clinical experience link to geriatric competencies?

Since the Association of American Medical Colleges geriatric competencies were released, educators are striving to incorporate them into medical student curricula. The purpose of this study is to examine medical students' reflections after an interdisciplinary, hospice staff-precepted clinical experience, and whether these reflections relate to the geriatric competencies which focus on palliative care. From July 2010 to June 2011, 155 2nd- and 3rd-year medical students participated in a required, half-day hospice experience, with 120 (77%) submitting narrative reflections for analysis. The narratives were analyzed using the constant comparative method associated with grounded theory, followed by consensus-building in an iterative process, to identify themes. Six themes were identified from the analysis of student narratives: demonstrating a new or expanded knowledge of hospice care (79%, 95/120), developing new insights about self and others (74%, 89/120), changing attitudes toward hospice care (63%, 76/120), linking patient needs with appropriate team members (43%, 52/120), understanding patient goals of care (43%, 51/120), and discussing palliative care as a treatment option (27%, 32/120). The authors conclude that a brief, interdisciplinary, hospice staff-precepted clinical experience is an effective model to inspire medical students to reflect on geriatric palliative care. Students clearly reflected on the geriatric palliative care competencies of symptom assessment and management, and gained insight into the role of the hospice team members and how hospice care can be a positive treatment option. Future educators should think about building on this type of high impact learning experience, and developing items to measure application of knowledge gained.

Core clerkship directors: their current resources and the rewards of the role.

PURPOSE: To conduct a national multidisciplinary investigation assessing core clinical clerkships and their directors, variances in resources from national guidelines, and the impact of the clerkship director role on faculty members' academic productivity, advancement, and satisfaction. METHOD: A multidisciplinary working group of the Alliance for Clinical Education (ACE), representing all seven core clinical disciplines, created and distributed a survey to clerkship directors at 125 U.S. MD-granting medical schools, in academic year 2006-2007. RESULTS: A total of 544 clerkship directors from Internal Medicine (96), Family Medicine (91), Psychiatry, (91), Pediatrics (79), Surgery (71), Neurology (60), and Obstetrics-Gynecology (56) responded, representing over 60% of U.S. core clinical clerkships. The clerkship directors were similar across disciplines in demographics and academic productivity, though clinical and clerkship activities varied. Departmental staff support for clerkships averaged 0.69 people, distinctly less than the ACE's 2003 guideline of a full-time coordinator in all disciplines' clerkships. Clerkship directors reported heavy clinical responsibilities, which, as in previous studies, were negatively related to academic productivity. However, many clerkship directors felt the role enhanced their academic advancement; a large majority felt it significantly enhanced their career satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The resources and rewards of the clerkship director role were similar across disciplines. Expectations of clerkship directors were considerable, including responsibility for clinical material and the learning environment. Resources for many fall short of those stated in the ACE guidelines, particularly regarding support staff. However, the findings indicate that the clerkship director role can have benefits for academic advancement and strongly enhances career satisfaction.