Interprofessional education for healthcare professionals. A BEME realist review of what works, why, for whom and in what circumstances in undergraduate health sciences education: BEME Guide No. 83.

AIM: To provide an evidence-informed program theory (PT) for Interprofessional Education (IPE) that adds to the knowledge base of how IPE in undergraduate health sciences education works. METHODS: We undertook a realist review of the literature and synthesis of the evidence combined with stakeholder experience. Our initial program theory (IPT), built around development, delivery and evaluation of IPE interventions, was tested and refined following an in-depth search of the literature and consultation with stakeholders. The literature (2010-2022) was selected based on the realist criteria of relevance and rigor, as well as on conceptual richness of the studies. RESULTS: Our PT is built upon 124 CMOs (Context of IPE interventions, Mechanisms that fired within that context, and IPE Outcomes), from 58 studies. Our PT comprises an array of elements found in the Context, including traits and behavioral displays of students and facilitators, and discusses four Mechanisms (feeling responsible, feeling enthusiastic/excited, feeling safe to take risks, and feeling ready), which are likely to lead to outcomes related to the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (sub)competencies. DISCUSSION: Results were linked to learning theories to further build our understanding. The PT can serve as a guide for the development, delivery, and evaluation of IPE interventions.

The influence of a digital clinical reasoning test on medical student learning behavior during clinical clerkships.

Recently, a new digital clinical reasoning test (DCRT) was developed to evaluate students' clinical-reasoning skills. Although an assessment tool may be soundly constructed, it may still prove inadequate in practice by failing to function as intended. Therefore, more insight is needed into the effects of the DCRT in practice. Individual semi-structured interviews and template analysis were used to collect and process qualitative data. The template, based on the interview guide, contained six themes: (1) DCRT itself, (2) test debriefing, (3) reflection, (4) practice/workplace, (5) DCRT versus practice and (6) 'other'. Thirteen students were interviewed. The DCRT encourages students to engage more in formal education, self-study and workplace learning during their clerkships, particularly for those who received insufficient results. Although the faculty emphasizes the different purposes of the DCRT (assessment of/as/for learning), most students perceive the DCRT as an assessment of learning. This affects their motivation and the role they assign to it in their learning process. Although students appreciate the debriefing and reflection report for improvement, they struggle to fill the identified knowledge gaps due to the timing of receiving their results. Some students are supported by the DCRT in exhibiting lifelong learning behavior. This study has identified several ways in which the DCRT influences students' learning practices in a way that can benefit their clinical-reasoning skills. Additionally, it stresses the importance of ensuring the alignment of theoretical principles with real-world practice, both in the development and utilization of assessment tools and their content. Further research is needed to investigate the long-term impact of the DCRT on young physicians' working practice.

Learning collaboration at the primary-secondary care interface: a dual-method study to define design principles for interventions in postgraduate training programmes.

BACKGROUND: Collaboration between primary and secondary care (PSCC) is important to provide patient-centered care. Postgraduate training programmes should provide training to learn PSCC. With a design based research (DBR) approach design principles can be formulated for designing effective interventions in specific contexts. The aim of this study is to determine design principles for interventions aimed to learn PSCC in postgraduate training programmes. METHODS: DBR is characterised by multi-method studies. We started with a literature review on learning collaboration between healthcare professionals from different disciplines within the same profession (intraprofessional) to extract preliminary design principles. These were used to inform and feed group discussions among stakeholders: trainees, supervisors and educationalists in primary and secondary care. Discussions were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis to formulate design principles. RESULTS: Eight articles were included in the review. We identified four preliminary principles to consider in the design of interventions: participatory design, work process involvement, personalised education and role models. We conducted three group discussions with in total eighteen participants. We formulated three design principles specific for learning PSCC in postgraduate training programmes: (1) The importance of interaction, being able to engage in a learning dialogue. (2) Facilitate that the learning dialogue concerns collaboration. (3) Create a workplace that facilitates engagement in a learning dialogue. In the last design principle we distinguished five subcategories: intervention emphasises the urge for PSCC and is based on daily practice, the presence of role models, the work context creates time for learning PSCC, learning PSCC is formalised in curricula and the presence of a safe learning environment. CONCLUSION: This article describes design principles for interventions in postgraduate training programmes with the aim to learn PSCC. Interaction is key in learning PSCC. This interaction should concern collaborative issues. Furthermore, it is essential to include the workplace in the intervention and make adjacent changes in the workplace when implementing interventions. The knowledge gathered in this study can be used to design interventions for learning PSCC. Evaluation of these interventions is needed to acquire more knowledge and adjust design principles when necessary.

Exploring power dynamics and their impact on intraprofessional learning.

BACKGROUND: During postgraduate training, considerable efforts for intraprofessional education are in place to prepare primary care residents (PC residents) and medical specialty residents (MS residents) for intraprofessional collaboration (intraPC). Power dynamics are inherently present in such hierarchical medical contexts. This affects intraPC (learning). Yet little attention has been paid to factors that impact power dynamics. This study aims to explore power dynamics and their impact on intraPC learning between PC residents and MS residents during hospital placements. METHODS: This study expands on previously published ethnographic research investigating opportunities and barriers for intraPC learning among residents in five Dutch hospitals. We analysed transcripts of observations and in-depth interviews using template analysis. A critical theory paradigm was employed. Discourse analysis additionally informed the data. RESULTS: We defined five interrelated themes that describe characteristics of power dynamics in intraPC learning during hospital placements: beliefs; power distribution; interaction style; subjection; and fearless learning. Power dynamics operate both within and between the themes: power distribution between PC residents, MS residents and MS supervisors seemed to be an attribution affected by underlying beliefs about professional norms or about other professions; beliefs influenced the way PC residents, MS residents and MS supervisors interacted; power distribution based on inequity could lead to subjection of PC residents; power distribution based on equity could lead to fearless learning; and open interactions enabled fearless intraPC learning. CONCLUSIONS: Power dynamics have an impact on intraPC learning among residents in hospitals. Constructive power dynamics occur when power distribution is based on equity, combined with sincere open interactions, actively inviting each other into discussions and enlisting the support of MS supervisors to foster fearless learning. This can be achieved by creating awareness of implicit beliefs and making them explicit, recognising interaction that encourages intraPC learning and creating policies that support fearless intraPC learning.

Designing the learning of intraprofessional collaboration among medical residents.

BACKGROUND: To preserve quality and continuity of care, collaboration between primary-care and secondary-care physicians is becoming increasingly important. Therefore, learning intraprofessional collaboration (intraPC) requires explicit attention during postgraduate training. Hospital placements provide opportunities for intraPC learning, but these opportunities require interventions to support and enhance such learning. Design-Principles guide the design and development of educational activities when theory-driven Design-Principles are tailored into context-sensitive Design-Principles. The aim of this study was to develop and substantiate a set of theory-driven and context-sensitive Design-Principles for intraPC learning during hospital placements. METHODS: Based on our earlier research, we formulated nine theory-driven Design-Principles. To enrich, refine and consolidate these principles, three focus group sessions with stakeholders were conducted using a Modified Nominal Group Technique. Next, two work conferences were conducted to test the feasibility and applicability of the Design-Principles for developing intraPC educational activities and to sharpen the principles into a final set of Design-Principles. RESULTS: The theoretical Design-Principles were discussed and modified iteratively. Two new Design-Principles were added during focus group 1, and one more Design-Principle was added during focus group 2. The Design-Principles were categorised into three clusters: (i) Culture: building collaborative relations in a psychologically safe context where patterns or feelings of power dynamics between primary and secondary care physicians can be discussed; (ii) Connecting Contexts: making residents and supervisors mutually understand each other's work contexts and activities; and (iii) Making the Implicit Explicit: having supervising teams act as role models demonstrating intraPC and continuously pursuing improvement in intraPC to make intraPC explicit. Participants were unanimous in their view that the Design-Principles in the Culture cluster were prerequisites to facilitate intraPC learning. CONCLUSION: This study led to the development of 12 theory-driven and context-sensitive Design-Principles that may guide the design of educational activities to support intraPC learning during hospital placements.

Learning clinical reasoning in the workplace: a student perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical reasoning is a core competency for every physician, as well as one of the most complex skills to learn. This study aims to provide insight into the perspective of learners by asking students about their own experiences with learning clinical reasoning throughout the medical Master's curriculum. METHODS: We adopted a constructivist approach to organise three semi-structured focus groups within the Master's curriculum at the medical school of the Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen (Netherlands) between August and December 2019. Analysis was performed through template analysis. RESULTS: The study included 18 participants who (1) defined and interpreted clinical reasoning, (2) assessed the teaching methods and (3) discussed how they used their context in order to learn and perform clinical reasoning during their clinical rotations. They referred to a variety of contexts, including the clinical environment and various actors within it (e.g. supervisors, peers and patients). CONCLUSION: With regard to the process by which medical students learn clinical reasoning in practice, this study stresses the importance of integrating context into the clinical reasoning process and the manner in which it is learnt. The full incorporation of the benefits of dialogue with the practice of clinical reasoning will require additional attention to educational interventions that empower students to (1) start conversations with their supervisors; (2) increase their engagement in peer and patient learning; (3) recognise bias and copy patterns in their learning process; and (4) embrace and propagate their role as boundary crossers.

How an EPA-based curriculum supports professional identity formation.

BACKGROUND: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are widely used in medical education, and they might be an important incentive to stimulate professional identity formation (PIF) of medical students, by actively encouraging participation in the workplace. The goal of this study was to explore the effects of an EPA-based curriculum on the PIF of medical students in undergraduate curricula. METHODS: In this study at the Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, the authors interviewed twenty-one medical students in three focus group interviews (November 2019), and conducted a thematic analysis based on both the synthesizing concepts PIF, communities of practice and EPAs, and newly defined themes. RESULTS: Four central themes proved crucial for understanding the influence of EPAs on PIF: creating learning opportunities, managing feedback, dealing with supervision in context and developing confidence. EPAs helped students to create learning opportunities and to choose activities purposefully, and the use of EPAs stimulated their feedback-seeking behavior. The context and way of supervision had a great impact on their development, where some contexts offer better learning opportunities than others. EPAs helped them develop trust and self-confidence, but trust from supervisors hardly appears to result from using EPAs. CONCLUSIONS: An EPA-based curriculum does stimulate PIF in the complex context of working and learning by supporting participation in the workplace and by encouraging feedback-seeking behavior. Striking the right balance between participation, feedback-seeking behavior and choosing learning activities is essential. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Netherlands Association of Medical Education (NVMO, case number 2019.5.12).

Healthcare professionals' knowledge of the systematic ABCDE approach: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability and Exposure (ABCDE) approach is a universal, priority-based approach for the assessment and treatment of critically ill patients. Although the ABCDE approach is widely recommended, adherence in practice appears to be suboptimal. The cause of this non-compliance is unknown. As knowledge is a prerequisite for adherence, the aim of this study was to assess healthcare professionals' knowledge of the ABCDE approach. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Radboud University Medical Center, the Netherlands. A digital multiple-choice assessment tool of the ABCDE approach was developed by an expert panel through a mini-Delphi method and validated by performing test item statistics and an expert-novice comparison. The validated test was sent to healthcare professionals (nurses, residents and medical specialists) of the participating departments: Anaesthesiology, Paediatrics, Emergency Department and the Neonatal, Paediatric and Adult Intensive Care Units. Primary outcome was the test score, reflecting individual level of knowledge. Descriptive statistics, regression analysis and ANOVA were used. RESULTS: Test validation showed a Cronbach's alpha of 0.71 and an expert-novice comparison of 91.9% (standard deviation (SD) 9.1) and 72.4% (15.2) respectively (p < 0.001). Of 954 eligible participants, 240 filled out the questionnaire. The mean (SD) test score (% of correct answers) was 80.1% (12.2). Nurses had significantly lower scores (74.9% (10.9)) than residents (92.3% (7.5)) and medical specialists (88.0% (8.6)) (p < 0.001). The Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (75.9% (12.6)) and Adult Intensive Care Unit (77.4% (11.2)) had significantly lower scores than Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (85.6% (10.6)), Emergency Department (85.5% (10.4)) and Anaesthesiology (85.3% (10.6)) (p < 0.05). Younger participants scored higher than older participants (-0.30% (-0.46;-0.15) in test score/year increase in age). CONCLUSION: Scores of a validated knowledge test regarding the ABCDE approach vary among healthcare professionals caring for critically ill patients. Type of department, profession category and age had a significant influence on the test score. Further research should relate theoretical knowledge level to clinical practice. Tailored interventions to increase ABCDE-related knowledge are recommended.

Unraveling the medical residency selection game.

The diversity of modern society is often not represented in the medical workforce. This might be partly due to selection practices. We need to better understand decision-making processes by selection committees in order to improve selection procedures with regard to diversity. This paper reports on a qualitative study with a socio-constructivist perspective conducted in 2015 that explored how residency selection decision-making occurred within four specialties in two regions in the Netherlands. Data included transcripts of the decision-making meetings and of one-on-one interviews with committee members before and after the group decision-making meetings. Candidates struggled to portray themselves favorably as they had to balance playing by the rules and being authentic; between fitting in and standing out. Although admissions committees had a welcoming stance to diversity, their practices were unintentionally preventing them from hiring underrepresented minority (URM) candidates. While negotiating admissions is difficult for all candidates, it is presumably even more complicated for URM candidates. This seems to be having a negative influence on attaining workforce diversity. Current beliefs, which make committees mistakenly feel they are acting fairly, might actually justify biased practices. Awareness of the role of committee members in these processes is an essential first step.

Chances for learning intraprofessional collaboration between residents in hospitals.

CONTEXT: Intraprofessional collaboration (intraPC) between primary care (PC) doctors and medical specialists (MSs) is becoming increasingly important. Patient safety issues are often related to intraPC. In order to equip doctors well for their task of providing good quality and continuity of care, intraPC needs explicit attention, starting in postgraduate training. Worldwide, PC residents undertake a hospital placement during their postgraduate training, where they work in proximity with MS residents. This placement offers the opportunity to learn intraPC. It is yet unknown whether and how residents learn intraPC and what barriers to and opportunities for exist in learning intraPC during hospital placements. METHODS: We performed an ethnographic non-participatory observational study in three emergency departments and three geriatric departments of five hospitals in the Netherlands. This was followed by 42 in-depth interviews with the observed residents and supervisors. The observations were used to feed the questions for the in-depth interviews. We analysed the interviews iteratively following the data collection using template analysis. RESULTS: Hospital wards are rich in opportunities for learning intraPC. These opportunities, however, are seldom exploited for various reasons: intraPC receives limited attention when formulating placement goals, so purposeful learning of intraPC hardly takes place; residents lack awareness of the learning of intraPC; MS residents are not accustomed to searching for expertise from PC residents; PC residents adapt to the MS role and they contribute very little of their PC knowledge, and power dynamics in the hospital department negatively influence the learning of intraPC. Therefore, improvements in mindset, professional identity and power dynamics are crucial to facilitate and promote intraPC. CONCLUSIONS: Intraprofessional collaboration is not learned spontaneously during hospital placements. To benefit from the abundant opportunities to learn intraPC, adjustments to the set-up of these placements are necessary. Learning intraPC is promoted when there is a collaborative culture, hierarchy is limited, and there is dedicated time for intraPC and support from the supervisor.

Competencies to promote collaboration between primary and secondary care doctors: an integrative review.

BACKGROUND: In a society where ageing of the population and the increasing prevalence of long-term conditions are major issues, collaboration between primary and secondary care is essential to provide continuous, patient-centred care. Doctors play an essential role at the primary-secondary care interface in realising 'seamless' care. Therefore, they should possess collaborative competencies. However, knowledge about these collaborative competencies is scarce. In this review we explore what competencies doctors need to promote collaboration between doctors at the primary-secondary care interface. METHODS: We conducted an integrative literature review. After a systematic search 44 articles were included in the review. They were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: We identified six themes regarding collaborative competencies: 'patient-centred care: a common concern', 'roles and responsibilities', 'mutual knowledge and understanding', 'collaborative attitude and respect', 'communication' and 'leadership'. In every theme we specified components of knowledge, skills and attitudes as found in the reviewed literature. The results show that doctors play an important role, not only in the way they collaborate in individual patient care, but also in how they help shaping organisational preconditions for collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides an integrative view on competencies necessary for collaborative practice at the primary-secondary care interface. They are part of several domains, showing the complexity of collaboration. The information gathered in this review can support doctors to enhance and learn collaboration in daily practice and can be used in educational programmes in all stages of medical education.

Exploring the views of successful applicants for medical school about gender medicine using a gender-sensitive video assignment.

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender influence health and disease outcomes, therefore, doctors should be able to deliver gender-sensitive care. To train gender-sensitive doctors, relevant sex and gender differences have to be included in medical education. In order to develop appealing, relevant, and effective education for undergraduate medical students, education should be tailored to students' level and anticipated on their ideas and assumptions. Therefore, we wanted to answer the following research questions: 1. What do aspiring medical students want to learn about gender medicine?; 2. How would they like to learn about gender medicine?; and 3. What are their ideas and assumptions about sex and gender differences in health and disease? METHODS: We performed an explorative thematic document analysis of educational assignments made by successful applicants (n = 50) during the selection procedure of their entry into medical school. To test aspirants' capacity for self-directed learning, students were asked to formulate their own study plan after they watched a video that resembled a future practical experience (a consultation with a patient). As the content of this video was gender-sensitive, the assignments of the successful applicants gave us the unique opportunity to examine aspiring medical students' views about gender medicine. RESULTS: Aspiring medical students were eager to start their training to become gender-sensitive doctors. They believed in better care for all patients and thought doctors should obtain gender competences during their medical training. Students preferred to start with acquiring basic biomedical knowledge about differences between men and women and continue their training by developing gender-sensitive communication skills in (simulated) practical settings. Students differed in their interpretation of the gender-sensitive video, some generalized potential differences to all men and all women. Teachers were considered as important role models in learning about gender medicine. CONCLUSIONS: We advise medical schools to teach gender medicine from the beginning of medical school, by focusing on sex differences first and adding gender related themes later on in the curriculum. As students may interpret gender-sensitive information differently, structurally embedding reflection on gender medicine with gender competent teachers is necessary.

The use of SBAR as a structured communication tool in the pediatric non-acute care setting: bridge or barrier for interprofessional collaboration?

SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendation) is a structured method developed for communicating critical information that requires immediate action. In 2016 the SBAR tool was introduced at the Amalia Children's Hospital in the Netherlands to improve communication between healthcare workers. Despite formal training and the introduction of aids to facilitate implementation, observed adherence to the tool was low. A qualitative study was undertaken to study the use of SBAR by pediatric residents and nurses in the non-acute clinical care setting of an academic children's hospital. Semi-structured focus group sessions were conducted and qualitatively analyzed using a constructed coding template to search for facilitators and barriers in the use of SBAR by different professionals. We found professionals' use of SBAR was influenced by departmental, cultural, and individual factors. Important themes for effective implementation and use of SBAR in an interprofessional setting, like situation dependency, learning climate and professional identity had not been addressed during the initial implementation. To facilitate SBAR's use it is important to identify professionals' needs to use the tool effectively, to take into account how tasks and responsibilities are perceived by different professions, and to stimulate interprofessional feedback and role modeling.

Using conversation analysis to explore feedback on resident performance.

Feedback on clinical performance of residents is seen as a fundamental element in postgraduate medical education. Although literature on feedback in medical education is abundant, many supervisors struggle with providing this feedback and residents experience feedback as insufficiently constructive. With a detailed analysis of real-world feedback conversations, this study aims to contribute to the current literature by deepening the understanding of how feedback on residents' performance is provided, and to formulate recommendations for improvement of feedback practice. Eight evaluation meetings between program directors and residents were recorded in 2015-2016. These meetings were analyzed using conversation analysis. This is an ethno-methodological approach that uses a data-driven, iterative procedure to uncover interactional patterns that structure naturally occurring, spoken interaction. Feedback in our data took two forms: feedback as a unidirectional activity and feedback as a dialogic activity. The unidirectional feedback activities prevailed over the dialogic activities. The two different formats elicit different types of resident responses and have different implications for the progress of the interaction. Both feedback formats concerned positive as well as negative feedback and both were often mitigated by the participants. Unidirectional feedback and mitigating or downplaying feedback is at odds with the aim of feedback in medical education. Dialogic feedback avoids the pitfall of a program director-dominated conversation and gives residents the opportunity to take ownership of their strengths and weaknesses, which increases chances to change resident behavior. On the basis of linguistic analysis of our real-life data we suggest implications for feedback conversations.

Judging residents' performance: a qualitative study using grounded theory.

BACKGROUND: Although program directors judge residents' performance for summative decisions, little is known about how they do this. This study examined what information program directors use and how they value this information in making a judgment of residents' performance and what residents think of this process. METHODS: Sixteen semi-structured interviews were held with residents and program directors from different hospitals in the Netherlands in 2015-2016. Participants were recruited from internal medicine, surgery and radiology. Transcripts were analysed using grounded theory methodology. Concepts and themes were identified by iterative constant comparison. RESULTS: When approaching semi-annual meetings with residents, program directors report primarily gathering information from the following: assessment tools, faculty members and from their own experience with residents. They put more value on faculty's comments during meetings and in the corridors than on feedback provided in the assessment tools. They are influenced by their own beliefs about learning and education in valuing feedback. Residents are aware that faculty members discuss their performance in meetings, but they believe the assessment tools provide the most important proof to demonstrate their clinical competency. CONCLUSIONS: Residents think that feedback in the assessment tools is the most important proof to demonstrate their performance, whereas program directors scarcely use this feedback to form a judgment about residents' performance. They rely heavily on remarks of faculty in meetings instead. Therefore, residents' performance may be better judged in group meetings that are organised to enhance optimal information sharing and decision making about residents' performance.

The effects of a non-cognitive versus cognitive admission procedure within cohorts in one medical school.

In medical school selection, non-cognitive performance in particular correlates with performance in clinical practice. It is arguable, therefore, that selection should focus on non-cognitive aspects despite the predictive value of prior cognitive performance for early medical school performance. The aim of this study at Radboud University Medical Center, the Netherlands, is to determine the effects of admitting students through an autonomous non-cognitive procedure on early medical school performance. We compared their performance to the performance of students selected through an autonomous cognitive selection procedure, enrolling in the Bachelor's curriculum simultaneously. 574 students (2013 and 2014 cohorts), admitted through non-cognitive selection (based on portfolio, CASPer and MMI, n = 135) or cognitive selection (curriculum sample selection, n = 439) were included in the study. We compared dropout rates, course credits and grades, using logistic and linear regression. The dropout rate was the highest in the non-cognitive selection group (p < 0.001). Students admitted through non-cognitive selection more often obtained the highest grade for the nursing attachment (p = 0.02) and had a higher mean grade for the practical clinical course in year 3 (p = .04). No differences in course grades were found. The results indicate that students perform best on the elements of the curriculum that are represented most strongly in the selection procedure they had participated in. We recommend the use of curriculum sample procedures, resembling the early medical school curriculum,-whether it has a more cognitive or a more non-cognitive focus-, to select the students who are likely to be successful in the subsequent curriculum.

Building a patient-centered and interprofessional training program with patients, students and care professionals: study protocol of a participatory design and evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: A common approach to enhance patient-centered care is training care professionals. Additional training of patients has been shown to significantly improve patient-centeredness of care. In this participatory design and evaluation study, patient education and medical education will be combined by co-creating a patient-centered and interprofessional training program, wherein patients, students and care professionals learn together to improve patient-centeredness of care. METHODS: In the design phase, scientific literature regarding interventions and effects of student-run patient education will be synthesized in a scoping review. In addition, focus group studies will be performed on the preferences of patients, students, care professionals and education professionals regarding the structure and content of the training program. Subsequently, an intervention plan of the training program will be constructed by combining these building blocks. In the evaluation phase, patients with a chronic disease, that is rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes and hypertension, and patients with an oncologic condition, that is colonic cancer and breast cancer, will learn together with medical students, nursing students and care professionals in training program cycles of three months. Process and effect evaluation will be performed using the plan-do-study-act (PDSA) method to evaluate and optimize the training program in care practice and medical education. A modified control design will be used in PDSA-cycles to ensure that students who act as control will also benefit from participating in the program. DISCUSSION: Our participatory design and evaluation study provides an innovative approach in designing and evaluating an intervention by involving participants in all stages of the design and evaluation process. The approach is expected to enhance the effectiveness of the training program by assessing and meeting participants' needs and preferences. Moreover, by using fast PDSA cycles and a modified control design in evaluating the training program, the training program is expected to be efficiently and rapidly implemented into and adjusted to care practice and medical education.

Lessons learned from narrative feedback of students on a geriatric training program.

Geriatrics continues to draw insufficient numbers of medical students today. Currently, little is known regarding how education can motivate students to choose geriatrics. The authors' aim was to examine geriatrics from the students' perspective to identify elements that can be useful in education and improving attitudes toward, interest in, and knowledge about geriatrics. The authors analyzed narrative reflection essays of 36 students and clarified the themes from the essays during focus group sessions. Four overarching themes that influenced students' perspective on geriatrics were identified: professional identity, perception of geriatrics, geriatric-specific problems, and learning environment. Students have an inaccurate image of clinical practice and the medical professional identity, which has a negative impact on their attitude toward, interest in, and knowledge of geriatrics. Furthermore, this study yielded the important role of the hidden curriculum on professional identity, the novelty of geriatric-specific problems to students, and the importance of educational approach and good role models.

Involving Medical Students in Providing Patient Education for Real Patients: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that involving students in patient education can contribute to the quality of care and medical education. Interventions and outcomes in this field, however, have not yet been systematically reviewed. The authors examined the scientific literature for studies on interventions and outcomes of student-provided patient education. METHODS: Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO) were searched for studies reporting patient education, undergraduate medical students, and outcomes of patient education, published between January 1990 and October 2015. Facilitators of and barriers to educational interventions were assessed using the Learning Transfer System Inventory. The learning yield, impact on quality of care, and practical feasibility of the interventions were rated by patients, care professionals, researchers, and education professionals. RESULTS: The search resulted in 4991 hits. Eighteen studies were included in the final synthesis. Studies suggested that student-provided patient education improved patients' health knowledge, attitude, and behavior (nine studies), disease management (three studies), medication adherence (one study), and shared decision-making (one study). In addition, involving students in patient education was reported to enhance students' patient education self-efficacy (four studies), skills (two studies), and behavior (one study), their relationships with patients (two studies), and communication skills (two studies). DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that student-provided patient education-specifically, student-run patient education clinics, student-provided outreach programs, student health coaching, and clerkships on patient education-has the potential to improve quality of care and medical education. To enhance the learning effectiveness and quality of student-provided patient education, factors including professional roles for students, training preparation, constructive supervision, peer support on organizational and individual levels, and learning aids should be taken into account. Future research should focus on further investigating the effects found in this study with high-level evidence.

The effect of curriculum sample selection for medical school.

In the Netherlands, students are admitted to medical school through (1) selection, (2) direct access by high pre-university Grade Point Average (pu-GPA), (3) lottery after being rejected in the selection procedure, or (4) lottery. At Radboud University Medical Center, 2010 was the first year we selected applicants. We designed a procedure based on tasks mimicking the reality of early medical school. Applicants took an online course followed by an on-site exam, resembling courses and exams in early medical school. Based on the exam scores, applicants were selected or rejected. The aim of our study is to determine whether curriculum sample selection explains performance in medical school and is preferable compared to selection based on performance in secondary school. We gathered data on the performance of students of three consecutive cohorts (2010-2012, N = 954). We compared medical school performance (course credits and grade points) of selected students to the three groups admitted in other ways, especially lottery admissions. In regression analyses, we controlled for out of context cognitive performance by adjusting for pu-GPA. Selection-admitted students outperformed lottery-admitted students on most outcome measures, unadjusted as well as adjusted for pu-GPA (p ≤ 0.05). They had higher grade points than non-selected lottery students, both unadjusted and adjusted for pu-GPA (p ≤ 0.025). Adjusted for pu-GPA, selection-admitted students and high-pu-GPA students performed equally. We recommend this selection procedure as it adds to secondary school cognitive performance for the general population of students, is efficient for large numbers of applicants and not labour-intensive.