Preparing Effective Narrative Evaluations for the Medical School Performance Evaluation (MSPE).

Introduction: In 2016, the AAMC Medical School Performance Evaluation (MSPE) Task Force issued recommendations to standardize the MSPE but did not address the quality of the written narratives in that document. Narrative evaluations are hampered by code words, polite rhetoric, and bias to the detriment of students. To address this, the AAMC's Group on Student Affairs and Group on Educational Affairs convened an expert group to consider the state of narratives in the MSPE and develop resources to improve their quality. Methods: A series of interactive workshops was developed and presented at an AAMC webinar and national meetings. A presentation outlining challenges and possible approaches to improvement was followed with large-group discussion and/or small-group breakout activity to analyze and improve upon sample clinical comments and create summary clerkship paragraphs. The initial webinar used polling questions and free-text prompts to gather feedback for future workshops. Anonymous survey responses were collected at the end of each subsequent workshop to determine perceived effectiveness and potential utility at participants' institutions. Results: Over 680 administrators, faculty, and staff participated in the webinar or in one of four national-level workshops. Respondents agreed that the modules would be useful in faculty development and wanted to replicate their learning at their own institutions for overall better impact on the quality of MSPE narratives. Discussion: This resource addresses an important gap in the medical education literature. A variety of stakeholders affirmed that these workshops have value in training writers to improve their narrative comments for the MSPE.

Design and Implementation of a Lifestyle Medicine Curriculum in Undergraduate Medical Education.

While scientific evidence demonstrates conclusive associations between unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and increased morbidity and mortality related to noncommunicable chronic diseases (NCDs), most physicians are not formally taught the root causes of NCDs nor how to counsel patients regarding their lifestyle behaviors for disease prevention and treatment. Since its inception in 2012, the University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville has designed, developed, and implemented an innovative, formalized lifestyle medicine curriculum to provide required undergraduate medical student training with a graduating program-level goal to "Deliver total health care using lifestyle medicine to prevent and treat morbidity and mortality related to chronic diseases." The process was guided by the Association of American Medical Colleges' Core Entrustable Professional Activities (required for graduates entering residency) and aimed to satisfy the Quadruple Aim components of better outcomes, lower cost, improved patient experience, and improved physician experience. Four essential instructional design phases, Analysis, Design, Development, and Evaluation, were used as systematic steps to create and deploy the curriculum. This article describes the evidence-based approach used and offers guidance to other undergraduate medical schools that may wish to implement lifestyle medicine training to improve physicians' medical knowledge and clinical skills for optimum health care.

The Human Factors Analysis Classification System (HFACS) applied to health care.

In spite of efforts to improve patient safety since the 1999 report, To Error Is Human, recent studies have shown limited progress toward preventing serious error. Most hospitals use root cause analysis as a method of serious event investigation. The authors postulate that this method suffers from 4 problems: (a) the use of root cause analysis is neither standardized nor reliable between organizations, (b) hospitals focus on "who" did "what" rather than on "why" the error occurred, (c) the identified causes are often too nonspecific to develop actionable correction plans, and (d) a standardized nomenclature does not exist to allow analysis of recurring errors across the organization. This article describes the modification of the Human Factors Analysis Classification System based on James Reason's theory of error causation for use in health care. This method resolves the 4 deficiencies noted above. The authors' experience investigating 105 serious events over 2 years is described.