Assessing Advanced Communication Skills via Objective Structured Clinical Examination: A Comparison of Faculty Versus Self, Peer, and Standardized Patient Assessors.

Construct: The construct addressed in this study is assessment of advanced communication skills among senior medical students. Background: The question of who should assess participants during objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) has been debated, and options discussed in the literature have included peer, self, standardized patient, and faculty assessment models. What is not known is whether same-level peer assisted learning can be utilized for formative assessment of advanced communication skills when no faculty, standardized patients, or other trained assessors are involved in providing feedback. If successful, such an educational model would optimize resource utilization and broaden the scope of topics that could be covered in formative OSCEs. Approach: The investigators developed a 4-station formative OSCE focused on advanced communication skills for senior medical students, and evaluated the concordance of assessment done by same-level peers, self, standardized patients, and faculty for 45 students. After each station, examinees completed a self-assessment checklist and received checklist-based assessment and verbal feedback from same-level peers only. Standardized patients completed checklist-based assessments outside the room, and faculty did so after the OSCE via video review; neither group provided direct feedback to examinees. The investigators assessed inter-rater agreement and mean difference scores on the checklists using faculty score as the gold standard. Findings: There was fair to good overall agreement among self, same-level peer, standardized patient, and faculty-assessment of advanced communication skills. Relative to faculty, peer and standardized patient assessors overestimated advanced communication skills, while self-assessments underestimated skills. Conclusions: Self and same-level peer-assessment may be a viable alternative to faculty assessment for a formative OSCE on advanced communication skills for senior medical students.

Barriers to Communication in a PICU: A Qualitative Investigation of Family and Provider Perceptions.

OBJECTIVES: Family and medical provider perceptions of communication barriers within the PICU are poorly understood. We designed a qualitative study to characterize the perspective of families and medical providers of critically ill children regarding communication barriers. The identified barriers may be used to direct efforts to improve communication. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted from August 2017 to January 2018. Interviews were audio recorded and professionally transcribed verbatim. SETTING: A PICU at a tertiary care academic center. PATIENTS: Forty-two families whose children were admitted to the PICU (excluding patients receiving end-of-life care or with protective services involvement) and 12 PICU staff members, including nurses, residents, fellows, and attending's. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: An interprofessional team of a physician, nurse manager, and medical student coded the transcripts. Interviewing continued until thematic saturation was reached. Codes were organized into common themes using a modified constant comparative method. The families interviewed represented 16 previously healthy children, and 26 children with a chronic health condition. Staff interviewed included three residents, three fellows, three attending intensivists, and three nurses. Participants' perceptions and experiences of barriers to communication included the following: 1) Communication breakdowns related to coordination of care among several services, 2) Family-centered rounds are insufficient for effective communication, 3) Undervaluing the knowledge of families of children with chronic health conditions or special needs, and 4) Communication breakdowns occur across provider hand-offs. Theme 3 was identified by families, but not by providers. CONCLUSIONS: Families and medical providers both identified several barriers to communication. However, only families identified the barrier "Undervaluing the knowledge of families with chronically ill children." Future work should explore these barriers and the discrepancy in perception between providers and families to determine if there are interventions that improve both family satisfaction and patient care.

Career Development Support in Pediatric Critical Care Medicine: A National Survey of Fellows and Junior Faculty.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the perceptions of current pediatric critical care medicine fellows and junior faculty regarding the extent and quality of career development support received during fellowship training. DESIGN: Web-based cross-sectional survey open from September to November 2015. SETTING: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited pediatric critical care medicine fellowship programs. SUBJECTS: Pediatric critical care medicine fellows (second yr or higher) and junior faculty (within 5 yr of completing a pediatric critical care medicine fellowship program). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 129 respondents to the survey, representing 63% of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited pediatric critical care medicine fellowship programs. Respondents were evenly divided between fellows and junior faculty. Nearly, half (49%) of respondents reported that their pediatric critical care medicine fellowship program provided a formal career development curriculum. Ideal career tracks chosen included academic clinician educator (64%), physician-scientist (27%), community-based (nonacademic) clinician (11%), and administrator (11%). There was a disparity in focused career development support provided by programs, with a minority providing good support for those pursuing a community-based clinician track (32%) or administrator track (16%). Only 43% of fellows perceived that they have a good chance of obtaining their ideal pediatric critical care medicine position, with the most common perceived barrier being increased competition for limited job opportunities. Most respondents expressed interest in a program specific to pediatric critical care medicine career development that is sponsored by a national professional organization. CONCLUSIONS: Most pediatric critical care medicine fellows and junior faculty reported good to excellent career development support during fellowship. However, important gaps remain, particularly for those pursuing community-based (nonacademic) and administrative tracks. Fellows were uncertain regarding future pediatric critical care medicine employment and their ability to pursue ideal career tracks. There may be a role for professional organizations to provide additional resources for career development in pediatric critical care medicine.

A Comparison Between In-Person and Virtual Communication Skills OSCE for Medical Students.

Objectives: This study investigates the effectiveness of a virtual format of an advanced communication skills observed structured clinical examination (OSCE) for senior medical students in comparison to an in-person format. The study also examines the emotional support students experience in the virtual setting. Our analysis was based on quantitative data collected through objective checklists and post-OSCE survey results. Methods: The virtual OSCE was a revision of an earlier in-person formative advanced communication skills OSCE for fourth-year medical students. Student performances were assessed by self and peers using objective checklists-the modified Master Interview Rating Scale (mMIRS) and Communication Behavior Checklist (CBC). The mMIRS measured interview process such as avoiding jargon and demonstrating empathy. The CBC examined interview content which included tasks specific to the content of the case. The OSCE was followed by a faculty-led debrief and quantitative survey. The virtual OSCE was conducted in 2021, and the results of the checklists and survey were compared with those collected from two earlier in-person OSCEs. Results: Eighty-three students participated in the virtual OSCE. There was no difference in mMIRS scores between the virtual and in-person OSCE. Overall CBC scores were lower in the virtual OSCE compared to in-person (p < 0.05). Sixty-seven out of 83 (80.7%) students completed the post-OSCE survey. There were no differences between the virtual and in-person OSCE in terms of educational value, whether the OSCE would change the way participants talk to patients, and preparedness to have serious conversations with patients. All respondents somewhat or strongly agreed with feeling emotionally supported during the virtual OSCE. Conclusion: The virtual format was a suitable alternative to an in-person, formative, advanced communication skills OSCE for medical students. The virtual OSCE was educationally effective and was met with student satisfaction and a sense of emotional support. Future virtual iterations must ensure adequate instruction on interview content.

Resilience Curriculum Improves Skills of Pediatric Fellows in Delivery of Difficult News.

BACKGROUND: Delivering difficult news to families is an essential but challenging skill. Pediatric trainees report limited confidence in this skill and perform poorly in simulation. We implemented the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Resilience Curriculum and evaluated performance and self-efficacy in delivering difficult news. METHODS: The AAP Resilience Curriculum, using the SPIKES (Set-up, Perception, Invitation, Knowledge, Empathy, and Summary) framework, was taught to pediatric fellows. Fellows' performance during simulations with standardized patients before and after curriculum implementation was scored with a SPIKES checklist. Pre- and post-test surveys assessed self-efficacy in delivering difficult news. RESULTS: Fellows (n=19) significantly improved their performance in delivering difficult news, increasing the median SPIKES checklist scores from 78% to 90% completion (P<0.001). Pediatric fellows (n=35) reported improved confidence from 3.4/5 to 3.9 (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric fellows demonstrated significant improvement in their ability to deliver difficult news during a simulated patient encounter and reported increased self-efficacy in delivering difficult news.