'How can we help the students learn?' A grounded theory study of simulated participants as educators.

PURPOSE: Despite the demonstrated value of simulated participant (SP) feedback, we are only beginning to understand how to optimize SPs' feedback practices for communication skills and strengthen their role as educators. SPs portray roles and engage in feedback practices to support simulated-based learning for communication skills training. SPs come to their role with diverse experiences, knowledge, and training, such as (a) professional actors, (b) lay people, and (c) health professions educators. This study explored what factors influenced SPs' role as educators, including their preparation, training, and approach to role portrayal and feedback practices and how these aspects were influenced by SPs' backgrounds. METHODS: Using grounded theory methodology, we collected and analysed data iteratively from 16 semi-structured in-depth interviews. We identified key concepts, using constant comparison and by exploring how concepts were related , to develop a conceptual model of SPs as educators. RESULTS: The SP role as educator was shaped by several interrelated dualities which spanned both the SP and learner roles and contributed to the identity formation of both SP and learner: (a) building competence (SP competence as educator and learner competence as healthcare professional), (b) engaging in reflective practice (SPs prompting learner reflection and SPs reflecting on their own role), and (c) establishing a safe space (SP needing to feel safe in their role to create safety to support learner engagement). SPs' backgrounds influenced how they learned to portray roles and how they engaged in feedback practices, both in-action, through in-role prompts and cues, and on-action, through post-scenario feedback discussions. CONCLUSION: Our conceptual model about SPs as educators informs SP selection and training. Further, this model enables practical suggestions for SP educators and faculty who involve SPs in teaching. Enhanced feedback practices have the potential to improve learning from simulated encounters.

Contrast-Specific Spherical Lesion Phantoms and Ancillary Analysis Software for the Objective Evaluation of Transrectal Ultrasound System Contrast Detectability.

Brachytherapy is an efficacious treatment option because of its benefits for patient recovery, dose localization and conformity, but these favorable outcomes can be ensured only if the transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) system is optimized for the specific application of ultrasound-guided prostate brachytherapy. The ability to delineate the prostate from surrounding tissue during TRUS-guided prostate brachytherapy is vital for treatment planning, and consequently, so is the contrast resolution. This study describes the development of task-specific contrast-detail phantoms with clinically relevant contrast and spherical target sizes for contrast-detail performance evaluation of TRUS systems used in the brachytherapy procedure. The procedure for objective assessment of the contrast detectability of the TRUS systems is also described; a program was developed in MATLAB (R2017a, The MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA) to quantitatively analyze image quality in terms of the lesion signal-to-noise ratio (LSNR) and validated with representative control test images. The LSNR of the Hitachi EUB-7500A (2013, Hitachi, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) TRUS system was measured on sagittal and transverse TRUS images of the contrast-detail phantoms described in this work. Results revealed the efficacy of the device as an image quality evaluation tool and the impact of the size, depth and relative contrast of the targets to the surrounding tissue on the contrast detectability of a TRUS system for both transducer arrays. The MATLAB program objectively measured the contrast detectability of the TRUS system and has the potential to determine optimized imaging parameters that could be designed as part of standardization of the imaging protocol used in TRUS-guided prostate brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

Use of a novel anthropomorphic prostate simulator in a prostate brachytherapy transrectal ultrasound imaging workshop for medical physicists.

PURPOSE: Ultrasound imaging training is not required as part of radiation oncology training programs nor does any objective competency measure exist to independently assess performance. Physical simulation training can provide a structured approach to this training but only if suitably challenging training simulators exist. This study describes the design and preliminary evaluation of a simulation-based transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) imaging training workshop developed for medical physicists involved in low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy (PBT). METHODS: The study incorporated novel high-fidelity anthropomorphic PBT TRUS training simulators and a TRUS imaging module with a blended-learning pedagogical approach, to address TRUS image optimisation and managing image quality. RESULTS: Results demonstrated a significant improvement in knowledge, with an average increase in multiple choice question score of 61% (P < 0.0002), and that there was a 46% (P < 0.0001) average increase in the participants perceived understanding of TRUS scanner operation, and an increase of 36% (P < 0.001) in participants readiness to optimise image quality and mitigate image artefacts. Focus group data explored participants' experiences, perceptions and challenges with TRUS LDR PBT. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a benefit in offering a simulation training workshop to medical physicists and the potential benefit to other healthcare professionals involved in prostate brachytherapy, by incorporating novel high-fidelity anthropomorphic PBT TRUS training simulators, in a simulated environment to practice ultrasound image optimisation for PBT image guidance. This approach to training would enable competency-based skill acquisition and continued proficiency or health professionals in the TRUS PBT procedure, outside of the surgical environment without direct exposure to patients.

An update on developments in medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A BEME scoping review: BEME Guide No. 64.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has fundamentally altered how education is delivered. Gordon et al. previously conducted a review of medical education developments in response to COVID-19; however, the field has rapidly evolved in the ensuing months. This scoping review aims to map the extent, range and nature of subsequent developments, summarizing the expanding evidence base and identifying areas for future research. METHODS: The authors followed the five stages of a scoping review outlined by Arskey and O'Malley. Four online databases and MedEdPublish were searched. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Included articles described developments in medical education deployed in response to COVID-19 and reported outcomes. Data extraction was completed by two authors and synthesized into a variety of maps and charts. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven articles were included: 104 were from North America, Asia and Europe; 51 were undergraduate, 41 graduate, 22 continuing medical education, and 13 mixed; 35 were implemented by universities, 75 by academic hospitals, and 17 by organizations or collaborations. The focus of developments included pivoting to online learning (n = 58), simulation (n = 24), assessment (n = 11), well-being (n = 8), telehealth (n = 5), clinical service reconfigurations (n = 4), interviews (n = 4), service provision (n = 2), faculty development (n = 2) and other (n = 9). The most common Kirkpatrick outcome reported was Level 1, however, a number of studies reported 2a or 2b. A few described Levels 3, 4a, 4b or other outcomes (e.g. quality improvement). CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review mapped the available literature on developments in medical education in response to COVID-19, summarizing developments and outcomes to serve as a guide for future work. The review highlighted areas of relative strength, as well as several gaps. Numerous articles have been written about remote learning and simulation and these areas are ripe for full systematic reviews. Telehealth, interviews and faculty development were lacking and need urgent attention.

Developments in medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 63.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic in March 2020. This rapid systematic review synthesised published reports of medical educational developments in response to the pandemic, considering descriptions of interventions, evaluation data and lessons learned. METHODS: The authors systematically searched four online databases and hand searched MedEdPublish up to 24 May 2020. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts, performed data extraction and assessed risk of bias for included articles. Discrepancies were resolved by a third author. A descriptive synthesis and outcomes were reported. RESULTS: Forty-nine articles were included. The majority were from North America, Asia and Europe. Sixteen studies described Kirkpatrick's outcomes, with one study describing levels 1-3. A few papers were of exceptional quality, though the risk of bias framework generally revealed capricious reporting of underpinning theory, resources, setting, educational methods, and content. Key developments were pivoting educational delivery from classroom-based learning to virtual spaces, replacing clinical placement based learning with alternate approaches, and supporting direct patient contact with mitigated risk. Training for treating patients with COVID-19, service reconfiguration, assessment, well-being, faculty development, and admissions were all addressed, with the latter categories receiving the least attention. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights several areas of educational response in the immediate aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and identifies a few articles of exceptional quality that can serve as models for future developments and educational reporting. There was often a lack of practical detail to support the educational community in enactment of novel interventions, as well as limited evaluation data. However, the range of options deployed offers much guidance for the medical education community moving forward and there was an indication that outcome data and greater detail will be reported in the future.

A review of the recommendations governing quality assurance of ultrasound systems used for guidance in prostate brachytherapy.

Ultrasound guided brachytherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer has become a routine treatment option, due to many benefits including patient recovery and dose localisation [1]; however it is not clear whether the standards which govern the image quality for these systems are adequate. Upon review of the recommended standards for ultrasound systems used in prostate brachytherapy procedures, the recommended tests do not appear to be specific to the clinical application of ultrasound guided prostate brachytherapy. Rather they are generic and similar to those recommended for other clinical applications such as general abdominal scanning [2]. Furthermore, there is growing evidence that these tests should be specific to the clinical application [3,4] in order to gain meaningful data about the performance of the system for the application, and also to detect clinically relevant changes in quality control results. An additional problem is that there are no clinically relevant test phantom recommended for the quality assurance of ultrasound systems used in prostate brachytherapy. The image quality for this application of ultrasound needs to be monitored to ensure consistent levels of confidence in the procedure. This paper reviews the currently recommended test guidelines and test phantoms for ultrasound systems used in prostate brachytherapy from the different standard bodies and professional organisations. A critical analysis of those tests which are most reflective of the imaging and guidance tasks undertaken in an ultrasound guided prostate brachytherapy procedure will also be presented to inform the design of a TRUS quality assurance protocol.