Exploring the lived experience of patients and families who speak language other than English (LOE) for healthcare: developing a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who use Languages other than English (LOE) for healthcare communication in an English-dominant region are at increased risk for experiencing adverse events and worse health outcomes in healthcare settings, including in pediatric hospitals. Despite the knowledge that individuals who speak LOE have worse health outcomes, they are often excluded from research studies on the basis of language and there is a paucity of data on ways to address these known disparities. Our work aims to address this gap by generating knowledge to improve health outcomes for children with illness and their families with LEP. BODY: We describe an approach to developing a study with individuals marginalized due to using LOE for healthcare communication, specifically using semi-structured qualitative interviews. The premise of this study is participatory research-our overall goal with this systematic inquiry is to, in collaboration with patients and families with LOE, set an agenda for creating actionable change to address the health information disparities these patients and families experience. In this paper we describe our overarching study design principles, a collaboration framework in working with different stakeholders and note important considerations for study design and execution. CONCLUSIONS: We have a significant opportunity to improve our engagement with marginalized populations. We also need to develop approaches to including patients and families with LOE in our research given the health disparities they experience. Further, understanding lived experience is critical to advancing efforts to address these well-known health disparities. Our process to develop a qualitative study protocol can serve as an example for engaging this patient population and can serve as a starting point for other groups who wish to develop similar research in this area. Providing high-quality care that meets the needs of marginalized and vulnerable populations is important to achieving an equitable, high-quality health care system. Children and families who use a Language other than English (LOE) in English dominant regions for healthcare have worse health outcomes including a significantly increased risk of experiencing adverse events, longer lengths of stay in hospital settings, and receiving more unnecessary tests and investigations. Despite this, these individuals are often excluded from research studies and the field of participatory research has yet to meaningfully involve them. This paper aims to describe an approach to conducting research with a marginalized population of children and families due to using a LOE. We detail protocol development for a qualitative study exploring the lived experiences of patients and families who use a LOE during hospitalization. We aim to share considerations when conducting research within this population of families with LOE. We highlight learning applied from the field of patient-partner and child and family-centred research and note specific considerations for those with LOE. Developing strong partnerships and adopting a common set of research principles and collaborative framework underlies our approach and initial learnings, which we hope spark additional work in this area.

Development of a Simulation-Based Interprofessional Teamwork Assessment Tool.

BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestone projects required each specialty to identify essential skills and develop means of assessment with supporting validity evidence for trainees. Several specialties rate trainees on a milestone subcompetency related to working in interprofessional teams. A tool to assess trainee competence in any role on an interprofessional team in a variety of scenarios would be valuable and suitable for simulation-based assessment. OBJECTIVE: We developed a tool for simulation settings that assesses interprofessional teamwork in trainees. METHODS: In 2015, existing tools that assess teamwork or interprofessionalism using direct observation were systematically reviewed for appropriateness, generalizability, adaptability, ease of use, and resources required. Items from these tools were included in a Delphi method with multidisciplinary pediatrics experts using an iterative process from June 2016 to January 2017 to develop an assessment tool. RESULTS: Thirty-one unique tools were identified. A 2-stage review narrowed this list to 5 tools, and 81 items were extracted. Twenty-two pediatrics experts participated in 4 rounds of Delphi surveys, with response rates ranging from 82% to 100%. Sixteen items reached consensus for inclusion in the final tool. A global 4-point rating scale from novice to proficient was developed. CONCLUSIONS: A novel tool to assess interprofessional teamwork for individual trainees in a simulated setting was developed using a systematic review and Delphi methodology. This is the first step to establish the validity evidence necessary to use this tool for competency-based assessment.

Simulation Fellowship Programs: An International Survey of Program Directors.

PURPOSE: To report on the evolution of simulation-based training (SBT) by identifying the composition and infrastructure of existing simulation fellowship programs, describing the current training practices, disclosing existing program barriers, and highlighting opportunities for standardization. METHOD: Investigators conducted a cross-sectional survey study among English-speaking simulation fellowship program directors (September 2014-September 2015). They identified fellowships through academic/institutional Web sites, peer-reviewed literature, Web-based search engines, and snowball sampling. They invited programs to participate in the Web-based questionnaire via e-mail and follow-up telephone calls. RESULTS: Forty-nine programs met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 32 (65%) responded to the survey. Most programs were based in the United States, but others were from Canada, England, and Australia. Over half of the programs started in or after 2010. Across all 32 programs, 186 fellows had graduated since 1998. Fellows and directors were primarily departmentally funded; programs were primarily affiliated with hospitals and/or medical schools, many of which had sponsoring centers accredited by governing bodies. Fellows were typically medical trainees; directors were typically physicians. The majority of programs (over 90%) covered four core objectives, and all endorsed similar educational outcomes. Respondents identified no significant universal barriers to program success. Most directors (18/28 [64%]) advocated standardized fellowship guidelines on a national level. CONCLUSIONS: Paralleling the fast growth and integration of SBT, fellowship training opportunities have grown rapidly in the United States, Canada, and beyond. This study highlights potential areas for standardization and accreditation of simulation fellowships which would allow measurable competencies in graduates.

Program directors' perceptions of importance of pediatric procedural skills and resident preparedness.

BACKGROUND: The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) objectives for training in pediatrics include 26 procedural skills, 11 of which are included in the final in-training evaluation report (FITER). The importance of each procedure for practice and the preparedness of pediatric residency graduates to perform these procedures are not known. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to all pediatric residency program directors and members of the RCPSC Specialty Committee in Pediatrics (N = 21) in October 2010, requesting them to rate the perceived importance and preparedness of graduating pediatric residents in all procedural skills on a 5 point Likert scale, as well as the presence of a curriculum and documentation for each procedure. Mean importance and preparedness were calculated for each procedure. RESULTS: Response rate was 16/21 (76 %). Perceived preparedness was significantly lower than importance for the majority of procedures (p < 0.05). Ten procedures had a high mean importance rating (>3) but a low mean preparedness rating (<3). Presence of a curriculum and documentation for procedures varied across centers, and their presence was correlated with both perceived importance and preparedness (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Many procedures in which pediatric residents are required to be competent by the RCPSC are felt to be important. Residents are not felt to be adequately prepared in several of the required procedures by the time of graduation. Procedures with high ratings of importance but low preparedness ratings should be targeted for curricular interventions.