Interprofessional education for healthcare professionals. A BEME realist review of what works, why, for whom and in what circumstances in undergraduate health sciences education: BEME Guide No. 83.

AIM: To provide an evidence-informed program theory (PT) for Interprofessional Education (IPE) that adds to the knowledge base of how IPE in undergraduate health sciences education works. METHODS: We undertook a realist review of the literature and synthesis of the evidence combined with stakeholder experience. Our initial program theory (IPT), built around development, delivery and evaluation of IPE interventions, was tested and refined following an in-depth search of the literature and consultation with stakeholders. The literature (2010-2022) was selected based on the realist criteria of relevance and rigor, as well as on conceptual richness of the studies. RESULTS: Our PT is built upon 124 CMOs (Context of IPE interventions, Mechanisms that fired within that context, and IPE Outcomes), from 58 studies. Our PT comprises an array of elements found in the Context, including traits and behavioral displays of students and facilitators, and discusses four Mechanisms (feeling responsible, feeling enthusiastic/excited, feeling safe to take risks, and feeling ready), which are likely to lead to outcomes related to the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (sub)competencies. DISCUSSION: Results were linked to learning theories to further build our understanding. The PT can serve as a guide for the development, delivery, and evaluation of IPE interventions.

A Qualitative Study on How Entrustable Professional Activities Support Medical Students in Their Transitions across Clerkships.

Introduction: Medical students regularly transition between clerkships. These transitions can lead to discontinuity in their development because of the need to adapt to a new environment. The use of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) might facilitate less disruptive transitions across clerkships, as they could provide support at the start of a clerkship. This study aims to shed light on how an EPA-based curriculum contributes to medical students' learning processes during transitions. Methods: The authors used a constructivist rapid ethnographic design. They conducted observations and interviews with 11 medical students in their Pediatrics clerkship; six of them were in clerkships not utilizing EPAs, and five were using EPAs. Data collection was followed by template analysis such that all data were coded with a template that was continually updated until the authors all agreed upon a definitive template. Results: Four themes proved important when considering the impact of EPAs during transitions between clerkships: transitions as a learning opportunity, building relationships in context, taking leadership in the landscape of practice and feedback-seeking behavior. Discussion: EPAs smooth clerkship transitions, as they establish continuity in the student's development and facilitate navigating discontinuity in transitions. Students build skills and confidence in order to grow and work with increasing independence within the clerkships. Transitions offer important learning opportunities for students, which can be fully exploited by using EPA guidance.

Learning collaboration at the primary-secondary care interface: a dual-method study to define design principles for interventions in postgraduate training programmes.

BACKGROUND: Collaboration between primary and secondary care (PSCC) is important to provide patient-centered care. Postgraduate training programmes should provide training to learn PSCC. With a design based research (DBR) approach design principles can be formulated for designing effective interventions in specific contexts. The aim of this study is to determine design principles for interventions aimed to learn PSCC in postgraduate training programmes. METHODS: DBR is characterised by multi-method studies. We started with a literature review on learning collaboration between healthcare professionals from different disciplines within the same profession (intraprofessional) to extract preliminary design principles. These were used to inform and feed group discussions among stakeholders: trainees, supervisors and educationalists in primary and secondary care. Discussions were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis to formulate design principles. RESULTS: Eight articles were included in the review. We identified four preliminary principles to consider in the design of interventions: participatory design, work process involvement, personalised education and role models. We conducted three group discussions with in total eighteen participants. We formulated three design principles specific for learning PSCC in postgraduate training programmes: (1) The importance of interaction, being able to engage in a learning dialogue. (2) Facilitate that the learning dialogue concerns collaboration. (3) Create a workplace that facilitates engagement in a learning dialogue. In the last design principle we distinguished five subcategories: intervention emphasises the urge for PSCC and is based on daily practice, the presence of role models, the work context creates time for learning PSCC, learning PSCC is formalised in curricula and the presence of a safe learning environment. CONCLUSION: This article describes design principles for interventions in postgraduate training programmes with the aim to learn PSCC. Interaction is key in learning PSCC. This interaction should concern collaborative issues. Furthermore, it is essential to include the workplace in the intervention and make adjacent changes in the workplace when implementing interventions. The knowledge gathered in this study can be used to design interventions for learning PSCC. Evaluation of these interventions is needed to acquire more knowledge and adjust design principles when necessary.

An Innovative Undergraduate Medical Curriculum Using Entrustable Professional Activities.

The need to educate medical professionals in changing medical organizations has led to a revision of the Radboudumc's undergraduate medical curriculum. Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) were used as a learning tool to support participation and encourage feedback-seeking behavior, in order to offer students the best opportunities for growth. This paper describes the development of the Radboudumc's EPA-based Master's curriculum and how EPAs can facilitate continuity in learning in the clerkships. Four guiding principles were used to create a curriculum that offers possibilities for the students' development: (1) working with EPAs, (2) establishing entrustment, (3) providing continuity in learning, and (4) organizing smooth transitions. The new curriculum was designed with the implementation of EPAs and an e-portfolio, based on these 4 principles. The authors found that the revised curriculum corresponds to daily practice in clerkships. Students used their e-portfolios throughout all clerkships, which stimulates feedback-seeking behavior. Moreover, EPAs promote continuity in learning while rotating clerkships every 1 to 2 months. This might encourage curriculum developers to use EPAs when aiming for greater continuity in the development of students. Future research needs to focus on the effect of EPAs on transitions across clerkships in order to further improve the undergraduate medical curriculum.

Self-efficacy and application of skills in the workplace after multidisciplinary trauma masterclass participation: a mixed methods survey and interview study.

PURPOSE: The most complex injuries are usually least often encountered by trauma team members, limiting learning opportunities at work. Identifying teaching formats that enhance trauma skills can guide future curricula. This study evaluates self-assessed technical and nontechnical trauma skills and their integration into novel work situations for multidisciplinary trauma masterclass participants. METHODS: This mixed methods study included participants of a multidisciplinary 3-day trauma masterclass. Ratings of trauma skills were collected through pre- and postcourse questionnaires with 1-year follow-up. Qualitative semi-structured interviews 9 months postcourse focused on the course format and self-perceived association with technical and nontechnical skills applied at work. RESULTS: Response rates of pre- and postcourse questionnaires after 1 day, 3 months, and 1 year were respectively 72% (51/71), 85% (60/71), 34% (24/71), and 14% (10/71). Respondents were surgeons (58%), anesthesiologists (31%), and scrub nurses (11%). Self-efficacy in nontechnical (mean 3.4, SD 0.6 vs. mean 3.8, SD 0.5) and technical (mean 2.9, SD 0.6 vs. mean 3.6, SD 0.6) skills significantly increased postcourse (n = 40, p < 0.001). Qualitative interviews (n = 11) demonstrated that increased self-efficacy in trauma skills was the greatest benefit experienced at work. Innovative application of skills and enhanced reflection demonstrate adaptive expertise. Small-group case discussions and the operative porcine laboratory were considered the most educational working formats. The experienced faculty and unique focus on multidisciplinary teamwork were highly valued. CONCLUSION: Course participants' self-assessed work performance mostly benefited from greater self-efficacy and nontechnical skills. Future trauma curricula should consider aligning the teaching strategies accordingly.

Healthcare professionals' knowledge of the systematic ABCDE approach: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability and Exposure (ABCDE) approach is a universal, priority-based approach for the assessment and treatment of critically ill patients. Although the ABCDE approach is widely recommended, adherence in practice appears to be suboptimal. The cause of this non-compliance is unknown. As knowledge is a prerequisite for adherence, the aim of this study was to assess healthcare professionals' knowledge of the ABCDE approach. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Radboud University Medical Center, the Netherlands. A digital multiple-choice assessment tool of the ABCDE approach was developed by an expert panel through a mini-Delphi method and validated by performing test item statistics and an expert-novice comparison. The validated test was sent to healthcare professionals (nurses, residents and medical specialists) of the participating departments: Anaesthesiology, Paediatrics, Emergency Department and the Neonatal, Paediatric and Adult Intensive Care Units. Primary outcome was the test score, reflecting individual level of knowledge. Descriptive statistics, regression analysis and ANOVA were used. RESULTS: Test validation showed a Cronbach's alpha of 0.71 and an expert-novice comparison of 91.9% (standard deviation (SD) 9.1) and 72.4% (15.2) respectively (p < 0.001). Of 954 eligible participants, 240 filled out the questionnaire. The mean (SD) test score (% of correct answers) was 80.1% (12.2). Nurses had significantly lower scores (74.9% (10.9)) than residents (92.3% (7.5)) and medical specialists (88.0% (8.6)) (p < 0.001). The Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (75.9% (12.6)) and Adult Intensive Care Unit (77.4% (11.2)) had significantly lower scores than Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (85.6% (10.6)), Emergency Department (85.5% (10.4)) and Anaesthesiology (85.3% (10.6)) (p < 0.05). Younger participants scored higher than older participants (-0.30% (-0.46;-0.15) in test score/year increase in age). CONCLUSION: Scores of a validated knowledge test regarding the ABCDE approach vary among healthcare professionals caring for critically ill patients. Type of department, profession category and age had a significant influence on the test score. Further research should relate theoretical knowledge level to clinical practice. Tailored interventions to increase ABCDE-related knowledge are recommended.

How an EPA-based curriculum supports professional identity formation.

BACKGROUND: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are widely used in medical education, and they might be an important incentive to stimulate professional identity formation (PIF) of medical students, by actively encouraging participation in the workplace. The goal of this study was to explore the effects of an EPA-based curriculum on the PIF of medical students in undergraduate curricula. METHODS: In this study at the Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, the authors interviewed twenty-one medical students in three focus group interviews (November 2019), and conducted a thematic analysis based on both the synthesizing concepts PIF, communities of practice and EPAs, and newly defined themes. RESULTS: Four central themes proved crucial for understanding the influence of EPAs on PIF: creating learning opportunities, managing feedback, dealing with supervision in context and developing confidence. EPAs helped students to create learning opportunities and to choose activities purposefully, and the use of EPAs stimulated their feedback-seeking behavior. The context and way of supervision had a great impact on their development, where some contexts offer better learning opportunities than others. EPAs helped them develop trust and self-confidence, but trust from supervisors hardly appears to result from using EPAs. CONCLUSIONS: An EPA-based curriculum does stimulate PIF in the complex context of working and learning by supporting participation in the workplace and by encouraging feedback-seeking behavior. Striking the right balance between participation, feedback-seeking behavior and choosing learning activities is essential. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Netherlands Association of Medical Education (NVMO, case number 2019.5.12).

Unraveling the medical residency selection game.

The diversity of modern society is often not represented in the medical workforce. This might be partly due to selection practices. We need to better understand decision-making processes by selection committees in order to improve selection procedures with regard to diversity. This paper reports on a qualitative study with a socio-constructivist perspective conducted in 2015 that explored how residency selection decision-making occurred within four specialties in two regions in the Netherlands. Data included transcripts of the decision-making meetings and of one-on-one interviews with committee members before and after the group decision-making meetings. Candidates struggled to portray themselves favorably as they had to balance playing by the rules and being authentic; between fitting in and standing out. Although admissions committees had a welcoming stance to diversity, their practices were unintentionally preventing them from hiring underrepresented minority (URM) candidates. While negotiating admissions is difficult for all candidates, it is presumably even more complicated for URM candidates. This seems to be having a negative influence on attaining workforce diversity. Current beliefs, which make committees mistakenly feel they are acting fairly, might actually justify biased practices. Awareness of the role of committee members in these processes is an essential first step.

Development of a tool for identifying and addressing prioritised determinants of quality improvement initiatives led by healthcare professionals: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Several frameworks have been developed to identify essential determinants for healthcare improvement. These frameworks aim to be comprehensive, leading to the creation of long lists of determinants that are not prioritised based on being experienced as most important. Furthermore, most existing frameworks do not describe the methods or actions used to identify and address the determinants, limiting their practical value. The aim of this study is to describe the development of a tool with prioritised facilitators and barriers supplemented with methods to identify and address each determinant. The tool can be used by those performing quality improvement initiatives in healthcare practice. METHODS: A mixed-methods study design was used to develop the tool. First, an online survey was used to ask healthcare professionals about the determinants they experienced as most facilitating and most hindering during the performance of their quality improvement initiative. A priority score was calculated for every named determinant, and those with a priority score ≥ 20 were incorporated into the tool. Semi-structured interviews with implementation experts were performed to gain insight on how to analyse and address the determinants in our tool. RESULTS: The 25 healthcare professionals in this study experienced 64 facilitators and 66 barriers when performing their improvement initiatives. Of these, 12 facilitators and nine barriers were incorporated into the tool. Sufficient support from management of the department was identified as the most important facilitator, while having limited time to perform the initiative was considered the most important barrier. The interviews with 16 experts in implementation science led to various inputs for identifying and addressing each determinant. Important themes included maintaining adequate communication with stakeholders, keeping the initiative at a manageable size, learning by doing and being able to influence determinants. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the development of a tool with prioritised determinants for performing quality improvement initiatives with suggestions for analysing and addressing these determinants. The tool is developed for those engaged in quality improvement initiatives in practice, so in this way it helps in bridging the research to practice gap of determinants frameworks. More research is needed to validate and develop the tool further.

Competencies to promote collaboration between primary and secondary care doctors: an integrative review.

BACKGROUND: In a society where ageing of the population and the increasing prevalence of long-term conditions are major issues, collaboration between primary and secondary care is essential to provide continuous, patient-centred care. Doctors play an essential role at the primary-secondary care interface in realising 'seamless' care. Therefore, they should possess collaborative competencies. However, knowledge about these collaborative competencies is scarce. In this review we explore what competencies doctors need to promote collaboration between doctors at the primary-secondary care interface. METHODS: We conducted an integrative literature review. After a systematic search 44 articles were included in the review. They were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: We identified six themes regarding collaborative competencies: 'patient-centred care: a common concern', 'roles and responsibilities', 'mutual knowledge and understanding', 'collaborative attitude and respect', 'communication' and 'leadership'. In every theme we specified components of knowledge, skills and attitudes as found in the reviewed literature. The results show that doctors play an important role, not only in the way they collaborate in individual patient care, but also in how they help shaping organisational preconditions for collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides an integrative view on competencies necessary for collaborative practice at the primary-secondary care interface. They are part of several domains, showing the complexity of collaboration. The information gathered in this review can support doctors to enhance and learn collaboration in daily practice and can be used in educational programmes in all stages of medical education.

Competencies for collaboration between general practitioners and medical specialists: a qualitative study of the patient perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the patient view of competencies essential for doctors to provide good collaboration at the primary-secondary care interface. DESIGN: We used a qualitative research approach. Focus groups with patients were conducted to explore their opinions of doctors' competencies to provide good collaboration between primary and secondary care doctors. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. SETTING: Dutch primary-secondary care interface. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen participants took part in five focus groups. Patients treated in both primary and secondary care, defined as having a minimum of two contacts with their general practitioner and two contacts with a medical specialty in the last 6 months, were included. Psychiatric patients and children were excluded from this study. RESULTS: Three groups of competencies were identified: (1) relationship building, both with patients and with other doctors; (2) transparent collaborating: be able to provide clarity on the process of collaboration and on roles and responsibilities of those involved and (3) reflective practising: to be willing to acknowledge mistakes, give and receive feedback and act as a lifelong learner. CONCLUSIONS: This focus group study enhances our understanding of the patient perspective on doctors' collaborative competencies at the primary-secondary care interface. With this information, doctors can improve their collaborative skills to a level that would meet their patients' needs. Patients expect doctors to be able to build relationships and act as reflective practitioners. Including patients in the collaborative process by giving them a role that is appropriate to their abilities and by making collaboration more explicit could help to improve collaboration between general practitioners and medical specialists.

Exploring the views of successful applicants for medical school about gender medicine using a gender-sensitive video assignment.

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender influence health and disease outcomes, therefore, doctors should be able to deliver gender-sensitive care. To train gender-sensitive doctors, relevant sex and gender differences have to be included in medical education. In order to develop appealing, relevant, and effective education for undergraduate medical students, education should be tailored to students' level and anticipated on their ideas and assumptions. Therefore, we wanted to answer the following research questions: 1. What do aspiring medical students want to learn about gender medicine?; 2. How would they like to learn about gender medicine?; and 3. What are their ideas and assumptions about sex and gender differences in health and disease? METHODS: We performed an explorative thematic document analysis of educational assignments made by successful applicants (n = 50) during the selection procedure of their entry into medical school. To test aspirants' capacity for self-directed learning, students were asked to formulate their own study plan after they watched a video that resembled a future practical experience (a consultation with a patient). As the content of this video was gender-sensitive, the assignments of the successful applicants gave us the unique opportunity to examine aspiring medical students' views about gender medicine. RESULTS: Aspiring medical students were eager to start their training to become gender-sensitive doctors. They believed in better care for all patients and thought doctors should obtain gender competences during their medical training. Students preferred to start with acquiring basic biomedical knowledge about differences between men and women and continue their training by developing gender-sensitive communication skills in (simulated) practical settings. Students differed in their interpretation of the gender-sensitive video, some generalized potential differences to all men and all women. Teachers were considered as important role models in learning about gender medicine. CONCLUSIONS: We advise medical schools to teach gender medicine from the beginning of medical school, by focusing on sex differences first and adding gender related themes later on in the curriculum. As students may interpret gender-sensitive information differently, structurally embedding reflection on gender medicine with gender competent teachers is necessary.

Does a Long-Term Quality and Safety Curriculum for Health Care Professionals Improve Clinical Practice? An Evaluation of Quality Improvement Projects.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the effects on clinical practice of continuing education quality and safety curricula. The aim of this study is to gain insight into learning outcomes on the fourth level of the Kirkpatrick evaluation model for systematically deployed quality improvement projects performed by health care professionals during a Masters in Healthcare Quality and Safety in the Netherlands. METHODS: The researchers reviewed 35 projects led by health care professionals in 16 different hospitals to determine their scopes and effects. Afterward, professionals took an online survey to determine the extent of their project's sustainability and spread. RESULTS: Improving health care safety was the most prevalent quality dimension (n = 11, 31%). A positive change was measured by professionals for 64% (n = 35) of the primary outcomes. Statistical significance was measured in 19 (35%) of the outcomes, of which nine (47%) were found to have a statistically significant effect. A minority of professionals (17%) judged their project as sustained by the department, while some stated that the intervention (37%) or the results of the project (11%) had spread. DISCUSSION: Although most projects indicated an improvement in their primary outcomes, only a few resulted in statistically significant changes. Teaching professionals in using evaluation methods that take into account the complex context where these projects are performed and teaching them leadership skills is needed to reduce the likelihood of unmeasured outcomes. Analyzing learning experiences of professionals in performing the project is important to see what they learned from performing quality improvement projects, providing experiences that may lead to sustainable effects in future projects.

Organic or organised: an interaction analysis to identify how interactional practices influence participation in group decision meetings for residency selection.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to shed light on interactional practices in real-life selection decision-making meetings. Adequate residency selection is crucial, yet currently, we have little understanding of how the decision-making process takes place in practice. Since having a wide range of perspectives on candidates is assumed to enhance decision-making, our analytical focus will lie on the possibilities for committee members to participate by contributing their perspective. DESIGN: We analysed interaction in seven recorded real-life selection group decision meetings, with explicit attention to participation. SETTING: Selection meetings of four different highly competitive specialties in two Dutch regions. PARTICIPANTS: 54 participants discussed 68 candidates. METHODS: To unravel interactional practices, group discussions were analysed using a hybrid data-driven, iterative analytical approach. We paid explicit attention to phenomena which have effects on participation. Word counts and an inductive qualitative analysis were used to identify existing variations in the current practices. RESULTS: We found a wide variety of practices. We highlight two distinct interactional patterns, which are illustrative of a spectrum of turn-taking practices, interactional norms and conventions in the meetings. Typical for the first pattern-'organised'-is a chairperson who is in control of the topic and turn-taking process, silences between turns and a slow topic development. The second pattern-'organic'-can be recognised by overlapping speech, clearly voiced disagreements and negotiation about the organisation of the discussion. Both interactional patterns influence the availability of information, as they create different types of thresholds for participation. CONCLUSIONS: By deconstructing group decision-making meetings concerning resident selection, we show how structure, interactional norms and conventions affect participation. We identified a spectrum ranging from organic to organised. Both ends have different effects on possibilities for committee members to participate. Awareness of this spectrum might help groups to optimise decision processes by enriching the range of perspectives shared.

Using conversation analysis to explore feedback on resident performance.

Feedback on clinical performance of residents is seen as a fundamental element in postgraduate medical education. Although literature on feedback in medical education is abundant, many supervisors struggle with providing this feedback and residents experience feedback as insufficiently constructive. With a detailed analysis of real-world feedback conversations, this study aims to contribute to the current literature by deepening the understanding of how feedback on residents' performance is provided, and to formulate recommendations for improvement of feedback practice. Eight evaluation meetings between program directors and residents were recorded in 2015-2016. These meetings were analyzed using conversation analysis. This is an ethno-methodological approach that uses a data-driven, iterative procedure to uncover interactional patterns that structure naturally occurring, spoken interaction. Feedback in our data took two forms: feedback as a unidirectional activity and feedback as a dialogic activity. The unidirectional feedback activities prevailed over the dialogic activities. The two different formats elicit different types of resident responses and have different implications for the progress of the interaction. Both feedback formats concerned positive as well as negative feedback and both were often mitigated by the participants. Unidirectional feedback and mitigating or downplaying feedback is at odds with the aim of feedback in medical education. Dialogic feedback avoids the pitfall of a program director-dominated conversation and gives residents the opportunity to take ownership of their strengths and weaknesses, which increases chances to change resident behavior. On the basis of linguistic analysis of our real-life data we suggest implications for feedback conversations.

Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee.

INTRODUCTION: In postgraduate medical education, group decision-making has emerged as an essential tool to evaluate the clinical progress of residents. Clinical competency committees (CCCs) have been set up to ensure informed decision-making and provide feedback regarding performance of residents. Despite this important task, it remains unclear how CCCs actually function in practice and how their performance should be evaluated. METHODS: In the prototyping phase of a design-based approach, a CCC meeting was developed, using three theoretical design principles: (1) data from multiple assessment tools and multiple perspectives, (2) a shared mental model and (3) structured discussions. The meetings were held in a university children's hospital and evaluated using observations, interviews with CCC members and an open-ended questionnaire among residents. RESULTS: The structured discussions during the meetings provided a broad outline of resident performance, including identification of problematic and excellent residents. A shared mental model about the assessment criteria had developed over time. Residents were not always satisfied with the feedback they received after the meeting. Feedback that had been provided to a resident after the first CCC meeting was not addressed in the second meeting. DISCUSSION: The principles that were used to design the CCC meeting were feasible in practice. Structured discussions, based on data from multiple assessment tools and multiple perspectives, provided a broad outline of resident performance. Residency programs that wish to implement CCCs can build on our design principles and adjust the prototype to their particular context. When running a CCC, it is important to consider feedback that has been provided to a resident after the previous meeting and to evaluate whether it has improved the resident's performance.

Judging residents' performance: a qualitative study using grounded theory.

BACKGROUND: Although program directors judge residents' performance for summative decisions, little is known about how they do this. This study examined what information program directors use and how they value this information in making a judgment of residents' performance and what residents think of this process. METHODS: Sixteen semi-structured interviews were held with residents and program directors from different hospitals in the Netherlands in 2015-2016. Participants were recruited from internal medicine, surgery and radiology. Transcripts were analysed using grounded theory methodology. Concepts and themes were identified by iterative constant comparison. RESULTS: When approaching semi-annual meetings with residents, program directors report primarily gathering information from the following: assessment tools, faculty members and from their own experience with residents. They put more value on faculty's comments during meetings and in the corridors than on feedback provided in the assessment tools. They are influenced by their own beliefs about learning and education in valuing feedback. Residents are aware that faculty members discuss their performance in meetings, but they believe the assessment tools provide the most important proof to demonstrate their clinical competency. CONCLUSIONS: Residents think that feedback in the assessment tools is the most important proof to demonstrate their performance, whereas program directors scarcely use this feedback to form a judgment about residents' performance. They rely heavily on remarks of faculty in meetings instead. Therefore, residents' performance may be better judged in group meetings that are organised to enhance optimal information sharing and decision making about residents' performance.

Building a patient-centered and interprofessional training program with patients, students and care professionals: study protocol of a participatory design and evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: A common approach to enhance patient-centered care is training care professionals. Additional training of patients has been shown to significantly improve patient-centeredness of care. In this participatory design and evaluation study, patient education and medical education will be combined by co-creating a patient-centered and interprofessional training program, wherein patients, students and care professionals learn together to improve patient-centeredness of care. METHODS: In the design phase, scientific literature regarding interventions and effects of student-run patient education will be synthesized in a scoping review. In addition, focus group studies will be performed on the preferences of patients, students, care professionals and education professionals regarding the structure and content of the training program. Subsequently, an intervention plan of the training program will be constructed by combining these building blocks. In the evaluation phase, patients with a chronic disease, that is rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes and hypertension, and patients with an oncologic condition, that is colonic cancer and breast cancer, will learn together with medical students, nursing students and care professionals in training program cycles of three months. Process and effect evaluation will be performed using the plan-do-study-act (PDSA) method to evaluate and optimize the training program in care practice and medical education. A modified control design will be used in PDSA-cycles to ensure that students who act as control will also benefit from participating in the program. DISCUSSION: Our participatory design and evaluation study provides an innovative approach in designing and evaluating an intervention by involving participants in all stages of the design and evaluation process. The approach is expected to enhance the effectiveness of the training program by assessing and meeting participants' needs and preferences. Moreover, by using fast PDSA cycles and a modified control design in evaluating the training program, the training program is expected to be efficiently and rapidly implemented into and adjusted to care practice and medical education.

Lessons learned from narrative feedback of students on a geriatric training program.

Geriatrics continues to draw insufficient numbers of medical students today. Currently, little is known regarding how education can motivate students to choose geriatrics. The authors' aim was to examine geriatrics from the students' perspective to identify elements that can be useful in education and improving attitudes toward, interest in, and knowledge about geriatrics. The authors analyzed narrative reflection essays of 36 students and clarified the themes from the essays during focus group sessions. Four overarching themes that influenced students' perspective on geriatrics were identified: professional identity, perception of geriatrics, geriatric-specific problems, and learning environment. Students have an inaccurate image of clinical practice and the medical professional identity, which has a negative impact on their attitude toward, interest in, and knowledge of geriatrics. Furthermore, this study yielded the important role of the hidden curriculum on professional identity, the novelty of geriatric-specific problems to students, and the importance of educational approach and good role models.