Challenges in engaging patients in feedback conversations for health care professionals' workplace learning.

INTRODUCTION: Patient feedback is relevant information for improvement of health care professionals' performance. Engaging patients in feedback conversations can help to harness patient feedback as a powerful tool for learning. However, health care settings may prevent patients and health care professionals to effectively engage in a feedback dialogue. To advance our understanding of how feedback conversations may support learning in and from practice, we sought to explore patients' and health care providers' perspectives on engaging patients in feedback conversations as informal learning opportunities. METHODS: For this qualitative study, we used a pragmatic approach and conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 health care providers and 10 patient consultants. We applied an inductive approach to thematic analysis to understand interviewees' perceptions regarding patient feedback for workplace learning. RESULTS: Participants attributed importance to patient feedback and described how the feedback may improve treatment relationships, professionals' performance and care processes on the team level and the organisational level. Participants experienced conflicting roles as patient and educator or expert and learner, respectively. Changing relationships, feelings of vulnerability and perceived power dynamics in treatment relationships would affect participants' engagement in feedback conversations. Patients and professionals alike saw a role for themselves in giving or inviting feedback but often missed the tools for engaging in feedback conversations. DISCUSSION: Patient feedback can contribute to professionals' practice-based learning but requires navigating tensions around conflicting roles and power dynamics in the treatment relationship. Both patients and health care professionals need to embrace vulnerability and may need facilitation and guidance to use patient feedback effectively. Attention to power dynamics, if not a shift towards collaborative relationships, is however crucial to engage patients in feedback conversations, thereby capitalising the power patients posses.

Continuous enhancement of educational quality - fostering a quality culture: AMEE Guide No. 147.

Internal quality assurance (IQA) is one of the core support systems on which schools in the health professions rely to ensure the quality of their educational processes. Through IQA they demonstrate being in control of their educational quality to accrediting bodies and continuously improve and enhance their educational programmes. Although its need is acknowledged by all stakeholders, creating a system of quality assurance has often led to establishing a 'tick-box' exercise overly focusing on quality control while neglecting quality improvement and enhancement. This AMEE Guide uses the concept of quality culture to describe the various dimensions that need to be addressed to move beyond the tick-box exercise. Quality culture can be defined as an organisational culture which consists of a structural/managerial aspect and a cultural/psychological aspect. As such this AMEE Guide addresses tools and processes to further an educational quality culture while also addressing ways in which individual and collective awareness of and commitment to educational quality can be fostered. By using cases within health professions education of both formal and informal learning settings, examples will be provided of how the diverse dimensions of a quality culture can be addressed in practice.

Learning in the workplace: Use of informal feedback cues in doctor-patient communication.

OBJECTIVES: We expect physicians to be lifelong learners. Participation in clinical practice is an important potential source of that learning. To support physicians in this process, a better understanding of how they learn in clinical practice is necessary. This study investigates how physicians recognise and use informal feedback from interactions with patients in outpatient settings as learning cues to adjust their communication behaviours in daily practice. METHODS: To understand physicians' use of informal feedback, we combined non-participant observations with semi-structured interviews. We enrolled 10 respiratory physicians and observed 100 physician-patient interactions at two teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Data collection and analysis were performed iteratively according to the principles of constructivist grounded theory. RESULTS: Following stages of open, axial and selective coding, we were able to conceptualise how physicians use cues to reflect on and adjust their communication. In addition to vast variations within and across patient encounters, we observed recurring adjustments in physicians' communication behaviours in response to specific informal feedback cues. Physicians recognised and used these cues to self-monitor communication performance. They had established 'communication repertoires' based on multiple patient interactions, which many saw as learning opportunities contributing to the development of expertise. Our findings, however, show differences in physicians' individual levels of sensitivity in recognising and using learning opportunities in daily practice, which were further influenced by contextual, personal and interpersonal factors. Whereas some described themselves as having little inclination to change, others used critical incidents to fine-tune their communication repertoires, and yet others constantly reshaped them, seeking learning opportunities in their daily work. CONCLUSIONS: There is large variation in how physicians use learning cues from daily practice. To enhance learning in and from daily practice, we propose turning workplace learning into a collaborative effort with the aim of increasing awareness and the use of informal performance-relevant feedback.

Perceptions of people with respiratory problems on physician performance evaluation-A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing calls for patient and public involvement in health-care quality improvement, the question of how patient evaluations can contribute to physician learning and performance assessment has received scant attention. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore, amid calls for patient involvement in quality assurance, patients' perspectives on their role in the evaluation of physician performance and to support physicians' learning and decision making on professional competence. DESIGN: A qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study took place in a secondary care setting in the Netherlands. The authors selected 25 patients from two Dutch hospitals and through the Dutch Lung Foundation, using purposive sampling. METHODS: Data were analysed according to the principles of template analysis, based on an a priori coding framework developed from the literature about patient empowerment, feedback and performance assessment. RESULTS: The analysis unearthed three predominant patient perspectives: the proactive perspective, the restrained perspective and the outsider perspective. These perspectives differed in terms of perceived power dynamics within the doctor-patient relationship, patients' perceived ability, and willingness to provide feedback and evaluate their physician's performance. Patients' perspectives thus affected the role patients envisaged for themselves in evaluating physician performance. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Although not all patients are equally suitable or willing to be involved, patients can play a role in evaluating physician performance and continuing training through formative approaches. To involve patients successfully, it is imperative to distinguish between different patient perspectives and empower patients by ensuring a safe environment for feedback.

Box-ticking and Olympic high jumping - Physicians' perceptions and acceptance of national physician validation systems.

PURPOSE: National physician validation systems aim to ensure lifelong learning through periodic appraisals of physicians' competence. Their effectiveness is determined by physicians' acceptance of and commitment to the system. This study, therefore, sought to explore physicians' perceptions and self-reported acceptance of validation across three different physician validation systems in Europe. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a constructivist grounded-theory approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 32 respiratory specialists from three countries with markedly different validation systems: Germany, which has a mandatory, credit-based system oriented to continuing professional development; Denmark, with mandatory annual dialogs and ensuing, non-compulsory activities; and the UK, with a mandatory, portfolio-based revalidation system. We analyzed interview data with a view to identifying factors influencing physicians' perceptions and acceptance. RESULTS: Factors that influenced acceptance were the assessment's authenticity and alignment of its requirements with clinical practice, physicians' beliefs about learning, perceived autonomy, and organizational support. CONCLUSIONS: Users' acceptance levels determine any system's effectiveness. To support lifelong learning effectively, national physician validation systems must be carefully designed and integrated into daily practice. Involving physicians in their design may render systems more authentic and improve alignment between individual ambitions and the systems' goals, thereby promoting acceptance.

Taxonomy of teaching methods and their use in health professions education: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Applying the lens of social constructivist theory, teaching methods facilitate the process of learning and may be used differently across settings to align learning goals. Teaching methods are used across disciplines, occupations and learning settings, yet terminology, descriptions and application for use vary widely. This scoping review will identify eligible literature of reported teaching methods with documented descriptions across disciplines with a focus of how teaching methods are applied to health professions education. A literary description of a teaching method was used as a basis from which to select eligible articles based on two criteria, a specified method and delivery of that teaching by a teacher figure. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using the extension of the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology aligned to Arksey and O'Malley's six-stage framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, this scoping review will systematically search ERIC, Embase, Web of Science and PubMed databases. The search strategy was supported by an information specialist. Eligible studies will be identified in a two-stage screening process with four researchers. To complement eligible peer-reviewed literature, we will also search out relevant grey literature including University Websites, Conference Programmes and handsearched reference lists. Data extraction will be performed using a developed data extraction tool. A narrative summary will accompany charted results and describe the results aligned to the study objectives. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As no intervention or patient recruitment is required for this research, ethics board approval is not required. Results will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal, conference presentations and where feasible reaching out to those organisations and universities with published glossaries of terms for teaching.

Co-Constructive Patient Simulation as an Experiential Tool for Continuing Professional Development in Healthcare.

In this commentary, we examine how to use the recently developed educational method called Co-constructive Patient Simulation (CCPS) to improve continuous professional development in healthcare. CCPS invites learners to participate in the creation of meaningful simulated scenarios while fostering reflection-in/on/for-action and community-building. By participating in the creation of the simulated scenarios, learners guarantee that the challenges addressed by the learning activities are aligned with their developmental stages and needs. Additionally, as learners may invite supervisors to take the "hot seat" during the simulation session, the CCPS approach allows learners to witness how supervisors would handle situations perceived as challenging. This exchange of roles creates an opportunity for camaraderie, as supervisors expose themselves and assume a vulnerable position. This camaraderie facilitates educational bonding and community building. As a result, in this participatory and co-creative approach to simulation, experts become the facilitators of a learner-centred activity, which increases motivation and allows tailored and contextualised learning. This co-constructive approach to simulation adds to the repertoire of more traditional CPD strategies by fostering spontaneity and authenticity. It integrates learning opportunities in clinical practice, amplifies learner's critical reflection and autonomy, and harnesses real-life challenges to offer meaningful solutions to lifelong learning. The democratic environment optimised by experts joining the activity and sharing their vulnerabilities with trainees further catalyzes the creation of a community for teaching, learning, and shared development.

A Changing Landscape for Lifelong Learning in Health Globally.

On 25 July 2022, the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Special Interest Group of the Association for Medical Education in Europe came together to open up discussions during a live webinar on 'Exploring the Evolution of CPD'. The objective was to bring together global medical educators to consider perspectives of CPD from the role of global lifelong learners, the role of educators and the role of education providers and health regulators. The landscape of CPD is evolving, and the roles of each key player must include specific actions for facilitated change. Delivering competency outcomes-based learning, fit for purpose, to lifelong learners in health will require (1) learner agency, (2) leadership from educators and (3) providers of lifelong learning to come together to improve delivery of CPD that leads to meaningful change in practice care delivery.

Twelve tips for patient involvement in health professions education.

Moving towards person-centered care, with equal partnership between healthcare professionals and patients, requires a solid role for the patient in the education of students and professionals. Patients can be involved as teachers, assessors, curriculum developers, and policy-makers. Yet, many of the initiatives with patients are isolated, small events for targeted groups and there is a lack of patient involvement at the institutional level. To support educators in involving patients, both at the institutional level and at single educational encounters, we offer twelve practical tips. This paper came about through an innovative collaboration between healthcare professionals, educators, teachers, and patients. These tips can be used as a tool to start or reinforce patient involvement in health professions education and provide guidance on how to make it a sustainable part of the curriculum. The article involves organizational conditions for success, tips for sustainable partnerships, ideas for curriculum design and proposes concrete teaching strategies. Finally, besides practical tips, we stress that involving patients in education is not business as usual, and paradoxically this needs to be acknowledged before it can become business as usual.

Meeting challenges in delivery of patient care: a reflection on the involvement of ERS in CPD of respiratory physicians.

A reflection on @EuroRespSoc education, a learning pathway for the future: better practice, better physicians, better patients http://bit.ly/2XHmr3J.

"Certified now what?" On the Challenges of Lifelong Learning: Report from an AMEE 2017 Symposium.

The increasing mobility of patients and healthcare professionals across the countries of Europe has highlighted the wide variations in both medical training, and provision of medical competency and skills. The maintenance of the standards defining competency and skills have national and international implications and have proved challenging for national regulatory bodies. Thus each nation has introduced different types of Continuing Professional Development (CPD), recertification and relicensing systems. At the Symposium entitled: " 'Certified … now what?' On the Challenges of Lifelong Learning" in August 2017 at the Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE) annual conference, we reviewed differing European national relicensing systems were reviewed. The review highlighted various lifelong learning and competence assessment approaches using examples from different medical specialties across several European countries.

ERS Congress highlight: educational forum on continuing professional development.

The ERS International Congress educational forum brings together experts to advance respiratory medicine http://ow.ly/hP9k30kz6ZM.

Doctors on the move: a European case study on the key characteristics of national recertification systems.

OBJECTIVES: With increased cross-border movement, ensuring safe and high-quality healthcare has gained primacy. The purpose of recertification is to ensure quality of care through periodically attesting doctors' professional proficiency in their field. Professional migration and facilitated cross-border recognition of qualifications, however, make us question the fitness of national policies for safeguarding patient care and the international accountability of doctors. DESIGN AND SETTING: We performed document analyses and conducted 19 semistructured interviews to identify and describe key characteristics and effective components of 10 different European recertification systems, each representing one case (collective case study). We subsequently compared these systems to explore similarities and differences in terms of assessment criteria used to determine process quality. RESULTS: Great variety existed between countries in terms and assessment formats used, targeting cognition, competence and performance (Miller's assessment pyramid). Recertification procedures and requirements also varied significantly, ranging from voluntary participation in professional development modules to the mandatory collection of multiple performance data in a competency-based portfolio. Knowledge assessment was fundamental to recertification in most countries. Another difference concerned the stakeholders involved in the recertification process: while some systems exclusively relied on doctors' self-assessment, others involved multiple stakeholders but rarely included patients in assessment of doctors' professional competence. Differences between systems partly reflected different goals and primary purposes of recertification. CONCLUSION: Recertification systems differ substantially internationally with regard to the criteria they apply to assess doctors' competence, their aims, requirements, assessment formats and patient involvement. In the light of professional mobility and associated demands for accountability, we recommend that competence assessment includes patients' perspectives, and recertification practices be shared internationally to enhance transparency. This can help facilitate cross-border movement, while guaranteeing high-quality patient care.

Re-certification of respiratory professionals: current practice and the future - educational forum report.

Re-certification of respiratory professionals: a report of an @ERStalk education forum held at #ERSLDN16 http://ow.ly/pUKY30bzcrK.