Assessing students interprofessional competence using a Swedish version of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric.

Valid instruments to assess interprofessional competence in students during clinical studies are needed, especially considering an increasingly pressured healthcare environment where supervisors have various experience of supervision and assessment. The aim of this study was to explore the applicability of a Swedish version of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR) in different clinical education contexts from both student and supervisor perspectives. The study used a qualitative design. Data was collected using focus group discussions with students (n = 35) and individual interviews with supervisors (n = 8). Data was recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using content analysis. The findings show that the instrument was perceived as a relevant working tool for assessing interprofessional competencies. The importance for learning was highlighted, which included an increased understanding and insight about different professions' roles and responsibilities, created opportunities of self-reflection and stimulated discussion about students' individual assessments. In terms of the interpretation and understanding of included concepts and user instructions, different suggestions for clarification emerged. Views about time for assessment varied between students and supervisors. In this study, the Swedish version of ICAR was considered an adequate assessment tool for assessing students' progression of interprofessional competencies in relation to course specific learning outcomes.

Flexible interprofessional student encounters based on virtual patients: a contribution to an interprofessional strategy.

It is challenging to organize interprofessional activities in terms of coordinating students' various schedules. These challenges can be overcome by providing flexible online opportunities based on virtual patients (VPs). This study set out to study feasibility of using a blended approach based on virtual patients and a flexible interprofessional student encounter. The encounter was arranged in pairs or triads between nursing and medical students from two separate courses. Data were gathered through a questionnaire and followed up with group interviews. Reflective texts from the interprofessional encounters were analyzed in relation to descriptions of interprofessional competence. The great majority (86%) chose to meet online due to its flexibility. The participants gained an understanding of the other profession's roles and competences and a holistic patient awareness. Given its flexible and scalable opportunities, the blended online virtual patient approach provides a valuable contribution to an interprofessional programme.

Complex caring needs without simple solutions: the experience of interprofessional collaboration among staff caring for older persons with multimorbidity at home care settings.

BACKGROUND: Older persons with multimorbidity being cared for at home often have complex needs which cannot be met by one single caregiver. Interprofessional collaboration is therefore considered necessary if care is to be organised according to the needs of the older person. To achieve coherent health care, municipalities and county councils need to develop their collaboration. AIM: The aim of this study was to illustrate how various professionals belonging to homemaker services, home care services in municipality and hospital-based home care services experience collaboration in caring for older persons with multimorbidity. METHOD: A hermeneutic approach was used. Eleven informants participated in the study and were individually interviewed. FINDINGS: The findings show that collaboration between players comprises various types of experiences which influence not only the staff who are involved in collaboration but also the outcome of the collaboration itself. The informants' experience of collaboration was defined by distrust and trust and by insecurity and security. To focus on patients' needs and to develop the collaboration further, it was important for informants to take the relations into account and have a reflective and questioning approach. This attitude resulted in a feeling of trust and security, and a flexible and critical approach without boundary drawings between basic and specialised care. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE OF PRACTICE: Complex situations cannot be solved with simple models. Instead, a flexible approach appears necessary with focus shifting from structures to interpersonal relations and interactions. Therefore, the different professionals have to work as a transprofessional team where close interactions, flexibility and improvisation are keys to success. The transprofessional team approach is suggested to have the potential to take the competence of all staff into account when high-quality home health care to older persons with multimorbidity is to be provided by multiple caregivers.

How do medical and nursing students experience emotional challenges during clinical placements?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate which kinds of situations medical and nursing students found emotionally challenging during their undergraduate education, and how they managed their experiences. METHODS: This study used an exploratory research design. We gathered qualitative data using an open-ended questionnaire distributed to students in the middle and at the end of their education. In total, 49 nursing and 65 medical students participated. Also, five students were interviewed individually to acquire richer data. Data were analysed using narrative thematic analysis. RESULTS: Medical and nursing students experienced a range of situations during their undergraduate education that they found emotionally challenging, mainly during clinical placements. The students' narratives concerned confronting patients' illness and death, unprofessional behaviour among healthcare professionals, dilemmas regarding patient treatment, students relating to patients as individuals and not diagnoses, and using patients for their own learning. The narratives concerned both the formal and the hidden curriculum, i.e., what is included in the profession (confronting illness and death), and what is not (unprofessional behaviour among healthcare professionals). Students managed their experiences by talking to trusted peers or supervisors, and by getting used to these situations. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the different knowledge, experiences, and conditions for medical and nursing students, our findings suggest that their experiences of emotional challenges are similar. Support and opportunities to talk about these experiences are important. Teachers, supervisors, and students need to be aware that students might experience emotionally difficult situations, and that the students need time for reflection and support.

Discrepancies and similarities in how patients with lung cancer and their professional and family caregivers assess symptom occurrence and symptom distress.

Historically, conceptual distinctions have not been made between the components of symptom experience--symptom distress and symptom occurrence--nor has the question of how distressing patients perceive different symptoms to be, irrespective of their current occurrence, been addressed. The aim of this study was to explore the hypothesis that there may be different patterns in discrepancies between how lung cancer patients and their caregivers assess symptom distress and in how they assess symptom occurrence. Thirty-three patient-nurse dyads and 54 patient-family caregiver dyads assessed patients' symptom distress and symptom occurrence. Discrepancies with regard to how patients, nurses, and family caregivers assessed symptom distress and symptom occurrence were identified. Patients and caregivers were more in agreement about which symptoms might cause distress than about current symptom occurrence. Caregivers rated symptom occurrence as greater than patients. The findings highlight the need to further explore what symptom characteristics caregivers address when assessing patients' symptom experiences.

Are the most distressing concerns of patients with inoperable lung cancer adequately assessed? A mixed-methods analysis.

PURPOSE Standardized questionnaires for patient-reported outcomes are generally composed of specified predetermined items, although other areas may also cause patients distress. We therefore studied reports of what was most distressing for 343 patients with inoperable lung cancer (LC) at six time points during the first year postdiagnosis and how these concerns were assessed by three quality-of-life and symptom questionnaires. PATIENTS AND METHODS Qualitative analysis of patients' responses to the question "What do you find most distressing at present?" generated 20 categories, with 17 under the dimensions of "bodily distress," "life situation with LC," and "iatrogenic distress." Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted. RESULTS The majority of statements reported as most distressing related to somatic and psychosocial problems, with 26% of patients reporting an overarching form of distress instead of specific problems at some time point. Twenty-seven percent reported some facet of their contact with the health care system as causing them most distress. While 55% to 59% of concerns reported as most distressing were clearly assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 and Lung Cancer Module instruments, the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale, and the modified Distress Screening Tool, iatrogenic distress is not specifically targeted by any of the three instruments examined. CONCLUSION Using this approach, several distressing issues were found to be commonly reported by this patient group but were not assessed by standardized questionnaires. This highlights the need to carefully consider choice of instrument in relation to study objectives and characteristics of the sample investigated and to consider complementary means of assessment in clinical practice.

Spontaneous reports of most distressing concerns in patients with inoperable lung cancer: at present, in retrospect and in comparison with EORTC-QLQ-C30+LC13.

Patients with lung cancer experience considerable distress. Therefore, accurate methods for assessing distress and quality of life over time may play a key role for managing and evaluating palliative care. Alternatives to commonly used standardized questionnaires are individual measures. This study prospectively and retrospectively explored the concerns that 46 patients with inoperable lung cancer spontaneously reported as causing most distress close to diagnosis and 6 months later. Changes in content individually generated through a structured inductive freelisting were compared with EORTC-QLQ-C30+LC13 ratings. The results showed that patients perceived a wide variety of concerns as most distressing and that their concerns changed over time. Between 56 and 62% of these concerns were assessed by items included in the EORTC-QLQ-C30+LC13 questionnaires. Furthermore, patients' reports of most distress from fatigue, pain and dyspnea were not always reflected in intensity ratings of comparable EORTC-QLQ-C30+LC13 items. These results indicate that items included in standardized measures are not always adequate to assess patients' concerns, priorities and changes over time. In addition to standardized questionnaires, individualized measures may be useful in the clinical palliative setting for providing detailed information about the individual's problems and prioritizations.

Do internal standards of quality of life change in lung cancer patients?

BACKGROUND: Measurement of health-related quality of life (QOL) over time often yields results that may be difficult to understand. Patients may change their internal standards of QOL as a result of adaptation to deteriorating health, a phenomenon referred to as response shift. OBJECTIVES: To examine changes in internal standards of fatigue, global health/QOL, and physical function in patients with inoperable lung cancer at 3 months (n = 115) and 6 months (n = 89) after a baseline measurement close to diagnosis. Significant changes were expected to occur only in patients who reported improvement or deterioration in fatigue and global health/QOL. METHODS: Fatigue, global health/QOL, and physical function were assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30, version 3.0). At follow-up, this questionnaire was administered conventionally and as a retrospective baseline assessment (thentest). Subjective transition questions were used to form mutually exclusive patient subgroups (i.e., deterioration, stable, or improvement). RESULTS: With respect to fatigue, significant changes occurred in patients reporting deterioration at 3 months follow-up and in patients reporting improvement after 6 months, but not in patients reporting improvement after 3 months or deterioration after 6 months. Significant changes in global health/QOL were found in patients reporting improvement at both 3 and 6 months follow-up and unexpectedly in stable patients after 3 months. No significant changes were found in patients reporting deteriorated global health/QOL at 3 and 6 months. Unexpectedly, changes occurred at both 3 and 6 months in patients reporting improved physical function. DISCUSSION: Given these mixed findings, it cannot be concluded that changes in internal standards occurred. These severely ill patients reported high levels of symptoms at baseline and may in part have adapted to their symptoms before study entry.

Symptoms in patients with lung carcinoma: distinguishing distress from intensity.

BACKGROUND: The patient perspective on distress associated with lung carcinoma is important, yet understudied. Previous research on symptom experience generally had not differentiated the dimension symptom intensity/frequency from which symptoms are associated with most distress. The objective of the current study was to determine whether patterns of symptom intensity were similar to patterns of symptom distress, whether patterns were consistent at different time points, whether patterns varied by subgroups, and whether high symptom intensity was equivalent to distress. METHODS: Four hundred adults who were newly diagnosed with inoperable lung carcinoma completed a measure of symptom intensity/frequency and a new measure of distress associated with symptoms at six time points during the first year after diagnosis. These data were supplemented by field notes by research nurses and by less structured, qualitative interviews. RESULTS: The mean ranking of distress in the total group and in all subgroups remained constant at all time points, with breathing, pain, and fatigue associated with the most distress. In contrast, the pattern of mean rank order of symptom intensity showed little consistency; however, fatigue had the highest intensity scores at all time points. CONCLUSIONS: The current data challenged the uncritical use of summated scores of different symptom items in the context of lung carcinoma. Breathing and pain appeared to function as icons representing threats associated with lung carcinoma, with distress described as related to the past and the present and to expectations for the future. One of the most promising implications of these data was in fostering a preventive paradigm for symptom palliation.