Let External Stakeholders Be Your Guide to Curricular Revision.

Schools and colleges of pharmacy undertake curriculum revisions for a variety of reasons ranging from the reactionary (eg, responding to changes in practice patterns, accreditation standards) to the proactive (eg, striving for innovation and excellence). Continuous quality improvement processes and published curriculum models, both described in this commentary, should be used to guide revision processes. Equally important is engaging the expertise of external stakeholders. While there may be challenges to incorporating external stakeholders in a curriculum revision process, their perspectives and knowledge can contribute to a more robust result, often in unexpectedly positive ways. Logic modeling is one mechanism to structure this approach, maximize the utility of external stakeholders, and strengthen the overall curriculum revision process. Regardless of the size of the revision, a good rule of thumb is to engage external stakeholders at the outset and to let their expertise be your guide.

Competencies for Diabetes Care and Education Specialists.

PURPOSE: Diabetes care and education specialists provide collaborative, comprehensive, and person-centered care and education to people with diabetes and cardiometabolic conditions. The implementation of the vision for the specialty has prompted the need to reexamine the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for diabetes care and education specialists in today's dynamic health care environment. The purpose of this article is to introduce an updated set of competencies reflective of the profession in this dynamic health care environment. Diabetes care and education specialists are health care professionals who have achieved a core body of knowledge and skills in the biological and social sciences, communication, counseling, and education and who have experience in the care of people with diabetes and related conditions. Members of this specialty encompass a diverse set of health disciplines, including nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, physicians, mental health professionals, podiatrists, optometrists, exercise physiologists, physicians, and others. The competencies are intended to guide practice regardless of discipline and encourage mastery through continuing education, individual study, and mentorship. CONCLUSION: This document articulates the competencies required for diabetes care and education specialists in today's dynamic health care environment as they pursue excellence in the specialty.

Developing the 2020 Diabetes Care & Education Specialist Competencies: A Modified Delphi Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to develop diabetes care and education specialty competencies that align with the Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists (ADCES). METHOD: A Delphi method of consensus development was used, comprising 5 survey rounds. Interprofessional diabetes specialty experts were asked to identify and rate trends and issues important to diabetes specialists on a global scale. Use of a 5-round Delphi process allowed diabetes care and education specialty experts to refine their views considering the progress of the group's work from round to round. RESULTS: A total of 457 diabetes care and education specialists across the United States in various professions participated in the Delphi rounds to identify a final set of 130 competencies across 6 domains. CONCLUSION: Use of the Delphi method as a consensus guideline helped to identify core competencies for diabetes care and education specialists, reflecting the knowledge and skills necessary to provide evidence-based, high-quality care.

A Framework for Optimizing Technology-Enabled Diabetes and Cardiometabolic Care and Education: The Role of the Diabetes Care and Education Specialist.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to present a framework for optimizing technology-enabled diabetes and cardiometabolic care and education using a standardized approach. This approach leverages the expertise of the diabetes care and education specialist, the multiplicity of technologies, and integration with the care team. Technology can offer increased opportunity to improve health outcomes while also offering conveniences for people with diabetes and cardiometabolic conditions. The adoption and acceptance of technology is crucial to recognize the full potential for improving care. Understanding and incorporating the perceptions and behaviors associated with technology use can prevent a fragmented health care experience. CONCLUSION: Diabetes care and education specialists (DCES) have a history of utilizing technology and data to deliver care and education when managing chronic conditions. With this unique skill set, DCES are strategically positioned to provide leadership to develop and deliver technology-enabled diabetes and cardiometabolic health services in the rapidly changing healthcare environment.

Technology Integration: The Role of the Diabetes Care and Education Specialist in Practice.

PURPOSE: Technology is rapidly evolving and has become an integral component of diabetes care. People with diabetes and clinicians are harnessing a variety of technologies, including connected blood glucose meters, continuous glucose monitors, insulin pumps, automated insulin delivery systems, data-sharing platforms, telehealth, remote monitoring, and smartphone mobile applications to improve clinical outcomes and quality of life. Although diabetes technology use is associated with improved outcomes, this is enhanced when the person using it is knowledgeable and actively engaged; simply wearing the device or downloading an app may not automatically translate into health benefits. The diabetes care and education specialist (DCES) has a central role in defining and establishing a technology-enabled practice setting that is efficient and sustainable. The purpose of this article is to describe the role of the DCES in technology implementation and to demonstrate the value of diabetes technology in both the care of the individual and as a tool to support population-level health improvements. CONCLUSION: By following the recommendations in this article, DCESs can serve as technology champions in their respective practices and work to reduce therapeutic inertia while improving health outcomes and providing patient-centered care for the populations they serve.

An Effective Model of Diabetes Care and Education: Revising the AADE7 Self-Care Behaviors®.

PURPOSE: The AADE7 Self-Care Behaviors® (AADE7) is a robust framework for self-management of diabetes and other related conditions, such as prediabetes and cardiometabolic diseases. It is the position of the American Association of Diabetes Educators (AADE) that, at the cornerstone of diabetes self-management education and support, the AADE7 is the framework for achieving behavior change that leads to effective self-management through improved behavior and clinical outcome measures. The AADE7 model guides the health care team in effective person-centered collaboration and goal setting to achieve health-related outcomes and improved quality of life. Continued research and evidence are critical to expand this model and broaden its application to other chronic conditions. Given the advances in the science of diabetes management, as well as in diabetes self-management education and support, AADE has evaluated the AADE7 within the framework of these advances, including the digital and dynamic health care landscape. CONCLUSION: This revised position statement blends the updates in research and AADE's vision and expansion beyond diabetes to refresh the AADE7 framework. This revision reflects the perspectives of all members of the health care team as they problem solve with individuals who are at risk for or who have diabetes and related conditions to achieve healthier outcomes.

Differences in Health Education Competencies Among Obesity Prevention and Nutrition Education Professionals.

The study purpose was to examine perceived health education competencies among those responsible for planning, implementing, and evaluating health education programs. A total of 172 obesity prevention and nutrition education professionals in the United States completed a survey measuring their perceived competency to plan, implement, and evaluate nutrition education/obesity prevention education programs based on the National Commission for Health Education Credentialing health education competencies and their endorsement of various health education approaches. Using a series of multiple hierarchical regression models, we found that those trained in health education had greater perceived competency in assessing needs (B = 1.19, t = 2.11, p = .03), planning health education programs (B = 1.63, t = 2.96, p = .004), implementing health education programs (B = 1.00, t = 2.22, p = .03), evaluating health education programs (B = 4.85, t = 3.54, p = .001), and managing health education programs (B = 1.70, t = 2.21, p = .03) than those trained in nutrition or dietetics. Additionally, those trained in health education were more likely to endorse the use of a skill-based approach to obesity prevention (B = 0.25, t = 2.53, p = .01) and less likely to endorse teaching facts and information (B = 0.24, t = 1.99, p = .05) than those trained in nutrition or dietetics. These results have implications for improving the effectiveness of health education and promotion programs and the professional preparation of health educators and dietitians alike.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. METHODS: The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. RESULTS: Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

Core competencies for diabetes educators: A scoping review.

AIMS: Diabetes educators (DEs) play a major role in diabetes education and management. The aims of this scoping review were to compile the currently identified core competencies for DEs and, to review the currently used criteria to assess DEs' core competencies. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted using the methodology of the Joanna Briggs Institute. Five databases (Ovid, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed) were searched. Keywords as well as inclusion and exclusion criteria were identified as search strategies and study selection for this review. RESULTS: A total of (n = 22) publications comprising sixteen peer-reviewed studies and six professional-organisations (grey literature) were selected for review, as they listed the core competencies of DEs. The most common core competencies were related to knowledge and skills in diabetes self-management education, knowledge of pathophysiology and epidemiology, teaching skills, clinical skills and cultural competency. Evidently, an appropriate tool for assessing DEs' competencies is currently unavailable. CONCLUSIONS: Given the importance of diabetes education in the care of people living with diabetes, it is imperative that DEs possess competencies in diabetes education and management. The review also identified the need to develop a globally applicable core competency assessment tool for DEs.

CHES, MCHES, and/or CPH? Selecting the Best Credential for You.

The health education profession within the broader context of public health has chosen certification to grant recognition to individuals meeting certain standards, as well as optional accreditation of academic programs. Regarding certification options for health education professionals, those who qualify may sit for the exams to achieve one of the following certifications: Certified Health Education Specialist (CHES), Master Certified Health Education Specialist (MCHES), or Certified in Public Health (CPH). Some health education and other professionals may be familiar with the concept of certification but may not be aware of the value of certification for the profession, their options for certification, or the processes of certification. This article provides information on CHES, MCHES, and CPH certifications and compares and contrasts their requirements. While many professionals may choose one credential over another, others may decide to pursue CHES/MCHES and the CPH. Credentialing continues to be an important part of advancing the health education profession and ensuring that those practicing in the field are highly qualified.

The challenges of becoming better sex educators for young people and the resources needed to get there: findings from focus groups with economically disadvantaged ethnic/racial minority parents.

The benefits of positive parent-adolescent relationships and effective communication on sexual risk have been demonstrated among minority parents and teenagers. However, there is need for illuminating how structural inequalities, such as economic disadvantage and being an ethnic/racial minority, shape parents' approaches to adolescent sexuality. Schalet's cultural framework describes White middle-income Dutch parents' 'normalization' (i.e. support for self-regulated sexuality, healthy relationships and normalization of teenage sexuality) versus White middle-income American parents' 'dramatization' (i.e. emphasis on raging hormones, battle between the sexes and pushing sex outside the home) of teenage sexuality, approaches which she argues contribute to differences in sexual health outcomes in the two countries. We adopt Schalet's framework to explore the approaches of 182 economically disadvantaged ethnic/racial minority parents attending 1 of 15 focus groups across New York State. The results revealed parents' dramatization of teenage sexuality, and how fears about their children's health and safety combined with a lack of resources and educational tools heightened this dramatization process. Yet parents identified communication skills and community resources to help them normalize teenage sexuality. The findings have the potential to inform policy makers and practitioners working to develop programs and policies to bolster parents' role as effective sex educators for adolescents.

Preparing Interprofessional Faculty to Be Humanistic Mentors for Medical Students: The GW-Gold Mentor Development Program.

INTRODUCTION: The GW-Gold Humanistic Mentor Development Program addresses the challenge faced by medical schools to educate faculty to prepare students for humanistic practice. Grounded in Branch's Teaching Professional and Humanistic Values model, the program prepares interprofessional faculty mentoring teams in humanistic communities of practice. The teams consist of physician-psychosocial professional pairs, each mentoring a small student group in their professional development course. Through GW-Gold workshops, faculty mentors develop interprofessional humanistic communities of practice, preparing them to lead second such communities with their students. This article describes the program and its evaluation. METHODS: To assess outcomes and better understand the mentor experience, we used a mixed-method validating triangulation design consisting of simultaneous collection of quantitative (mentor and student surveys) and qualitative (open-ended survey questions and focus group) data. Data were analyzed in parallel and merged at the point of interpretation, allowing for triangulation and validation of outcomes. RESULTS: Mentors rated the program highly, gained confidence in their humanistic skills, and received high scores from students. Three themes emerged that validated program design, confirmed outcomes, and expanded on the mentor experience: (1) Interprofessional faculty communities developed through observation, collaboration, reflection, and dialogue; (2) Humanistic mentors created safe environments for student engagement; and (3) Engaging in interprofessional humanistic communities of practice expanded mentors' personal and professional identities. DISCUSSION: Outcomes support the value of the GW-Gold program's distinctive features in preparing faculty to sustain humanism in medical education: an interprofessional approach and small communities of practice built on humanistic values.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. Methods The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. Results Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. Conclusion Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

Management of Children With Diabetes in the School Setting.

Diabetes educators are well positioned to help optimize care of the student with diabetes within the school setting.

[A professional identity rooted in public health]. / Une identité professionnelle ancrée dans la santé publique.

Marie-Sophie Cherillat was trained by managers well versed in the issues surrounding public healthcare. She focuses her practice on the health determinants specific to each individual patient and is committed to therapeutic education.

What are the attributes of a good health educator?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the attributes that students and educators believe are important to being a good health educator in a non-clinical setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of first-year health science students and educators involved with a Health Science course in Melbourne, Australia was performed. A convenience sampling approach was implemented, with participants were required to rate the importance of teaching attributes on a previously developed 15-item written questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were generated, with Pearson's chi-square statistics used to examine differences between groups. In total 94/147 (63.9%) of students and 15/15 (100%) of educators participated in the study. RESULTS: Of the 15 attributes, only 'scholarly activity' was not deemed to be not as an important attribute to define a good educator. Knowledge base (50% vs. 13.3%) and feedback skills (22.3% vs. 0%) were rated as important attributes by students in comparison to educators. Professionalism (20% vs. 5.3%), scholarly activity (20% vs. 3.2%) and role modelling (26.7% vs. 3.2%) were rated as the most important attributes by educators in comparison to students. CONCLUSIONS: No single attribute makes a good health educator; rather health educators are required to have a rounded approach to teaching. Students have greater focus on the educator providing a transfer of knowledge. Educators are additionally focused on professionalism attributes, which may not be valued by students. Students and educators must enter into a clearer understanding of expectations, from both parties, to obtain optimal education outcomes.

Developing educators for continuing professional development.

Continuing professional development (CPD) is part of the medical education continuum, has been shown to produce improved physician practice and good patient outcomes, and is increasingly required for revalidation of medical licensure. CPD can be considered a discipline in its own right but is the least formally organized stage in medical education. CPD educators play a central role, but there has been remarkably little published work specifically describing CPD educators. This narrative review, using ophthalmology as exemplar medical specialty, describes trends affecting CPD educators and their sources, attributes, and development needs, mainly extrapolated from information regarding other medical educators in the medical education continuum spectrum. Future research needs are discussed.