What About Empathy? A Qualitative Study Exploring the Role of a Podcast as an Asynchronous Empathy Teaching Tool.

Purpose: Though medical education podcasts are fast gaining popularity, they are overwhelmingly focused on teaching the medical expert role of physicians. We explored how medical learners and educators engaged with and learned from an empathy and communication-focused podcast and sought their recommendations for integrating the podcast into medical curricula. Methods: Six virtual, semi-structured focus groups were conducted with educators and learners within a large urban hospital and university setting. Participants were asked to listen to pre-selected episodes of the About Empathy podcast in advance. Thematic analysis was used to explore experiences and perceptions of empathy teaching and learning. Results: There were 24 participants. We identified six themes related to the podcast and empathy learning: (1) forging connection through stories, (2) creating space to reflect on empathy, (3) shifting perspectives and biases, (4) feeling validated and enabling self-compassion, (5) gaining knowledge and building skills through empathetic communication, and (6) translating new knowledge and skills into practice. Participants highlighted that the podcast's portability and asynchronous nature allowed them to be more fully present, reflective, and intentional in their learning. Discussion: The About Empathy podcast was experienced as a flexible, just-in-time tool that promoted self-agency over one's learning, reflective practice, and knowledge and skill acquisition, particularly with respect to empathic communication. Benefits of asynchronous e-learning tools such as podcasts support a shift to a blended learning model. Challenges finding a curricular home for this empathy-focused podcast require further consideration.

Misalignments of purpose and power in an early Canadian interprofessional education initiative.

Interprofessional education (IPE) has been widely incorporated into health professional curricula and accreditation standards despite an arguably thin base of evidence regarding its clinical effects, theoretical underpinnings, and social implications. To better understand how and why IPE first took root, but failed to grow, this study examines one of the earliest documented IPE initiatives, which took place at the University of British Columbia between 1960 and 1975. We examined a subset of 110 texts (academic literature, grey literature, and unpublished records) from a larger study that uses Critical Discourse Analysis to trace the emergence of IPE in Canada. We asked how IPE was promoted and received, by whom, for what purposes, and to what effects. Our analysis demonstrates that IPE was promoted as a response to local challenges for the Faculty of Medicine as well as national challenges for Canada's emerging public healthcare system. These dual exigencies enabled the IPE initiative, but they shaped it in somewhat divergent ways: the former gave rise to its core component (a health sciences centre) and the latter its ultimate purpose (increasing the role of non-medical professions in primary care). Reception of the initiative was complicated by a further tension: nurses and allied health professionals were sometimes represented as independent experts with unique knowledge and skills, and sometimes as assistants or substitutes for medical doctors. We relate the successes and frustrations of this early initiative to particular (mis)alignments of purpose and relationships of power, some of which continue to enable and constrain IPE today.

Questioning context: a set of interdisciplinary questions for investigating contextual factors affecting health decision making.

OBJECTIVE: To combine insights from multiple disciplines into a set of questions that can be used to investigate contextual factors affecting health decision making. BACKGROUND: Decision-making processes and outcomes may be shaped by a range of non-medical or 'contextual' factors particular to an individual including social, economic, political, geographical and institutional conditions. Research concerning contextual factors occurs across many disciplines and theoretical domains, but few conceptual tools have attempted to integrate and translate this wide-ranging research for health decision-making purposes. METHODS: To formulate this tool we employed an iterative, collaborative process of scenario development and question generation. Five hypothetical health decision-making scenarios (preventative, screening, curative, supportive and palliative) were developed and used to generate a set of exploratory questions that aim to highlight potential contextual factors across a range of health decisions. FINDINGS: We present an exploratory tool consisting of questions organized into four thematic domains - Bodies, Technologies, Place and Work (BTPW) - articulating wide-ranging contextual factors relevant to health decision making. The BTPW tool encompasses health-related scholarship and research from a range of disciplines pertinent to health decision making, and identifies concrete points of intersection between its four thematic domains. Examples of the practical application of the questions are also provided. CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory questions provide an interdisciplinary toolkit for identifying the complex contextual factors affecting decision making. The set of questions comprised by the BTPW tool may be applied wholly or partially in the context of clinical practice, policy development and health-related research.

Uptake of a team briefing in the operating theatre: a Burkean dramatistic analysis.

Communication among healthcare professionals is a focus for research and policy interventions designed to improve patient safety, but the challenges of changing interprofessional communication patterns are rarely described. We present an analysis of 756 preoperative briefings conducted by general surgery teams (anesthesiologists, nurses, and surgeons) at four urban Canadian hospitals in the context of two research studies conducted between August 2004 and December 2007. We ask the questions: how and why did briefings succeed, how and why did they fail, and what did they mean for different participants? Ethnographic fieldnotes documenting the coordination and performance of team briefings were analyzed using Kenneth Burke's concepts of motive and attitude. The language and behaviour of participants were interpreted as purposive and situated actions which reveal perceptions, beliefs and values. Motives and attitudes varied both within and across sites, professions, individuals, and briefings. They were contingent on the organizational, medical and social scenes in which the briefings took place and on participants' multiple perceived purposes for participating (protecting patient safety, exchanging information, engaging with the team, fulfilling professional commitments, participating in research, and meeting social expectations). Participants' attitudes reflected their recognition (or rejection) of specific purposes, the briefings' perceived effectiveness in serving these purposes, and the briefings' perceived alignment (or conflict) with other priorities. Our findings illustrate the intrinsically rhetorical and variable nature of change.

Evaluation of a preoperative checklist and team briefing among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists to reduce failures in communication.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether structured team briefings improve operating room communication. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This 13-month prospective study used a preintervention/postintervention design. All staff and trainees in the division of general surgery at a Canadian academic tertiary care hospital were invited to participate. Participants included 11 general surgeons, 24 surgical trainees, 41 operating room nurses, 28 anesthesiologists, and 24 anesthesia trainees. INTERVENTION: Surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists gathered before 302 patient procedures for a short team briefing structured by a checklist. Main Outcome Measure The primary outcome measure was the number of communication failures (late, inaccurate, unresolved, or exclusive communication) per procedure. Communication failures and their consequences were documented by 1 of 4 trained observers using a validated observational scale. Secondary outcomes were the number of checklist briefings that demonstrated "utility" (an effect on the knowledge or actions of the team) and participants' perceptions of the briefing experience. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-two procedures were observed (86 preintervention, 86 postintervention). The mean (SD) number of communication failures per procedure declined from 3.95 (3.20) before the intervention to 1.31 (1.53) after the intervention (P < .001). Thirty-four percent of briefings demonstrated utility, including identification of problems, resolution of critical knowledge gaps, decision-making, and follow-up actions. CONCLUSIONS: Interprofessional checklist briefings reduced the number of communication failures and promoted proactive and collaborative team communication.

A theory-based instrument to evaluate team communication in the operating room: balancing measurement authenticity and reliability.

BACKGROUND: Breakdown in communication among members of the healthcare team threatens the effective delivery of health services, and raises the risk of errors and adverse events. AIM: To describe the process of developing an authentic, theory-based evaluation instrument that measures communication among members of the operating room team by documenting communication failures. METHODS: 25 procedures were viewed by 3 observers observing in pairs, and records of events on each communication failure observed were independently completed by each observer. Each record included the type and outcome of the failure (both selected from a checklist of options), as well as the time of occurrence and a description of the event. For each observer, records of events were compiled to create a profile for the procedure. RESULTS: At the level of identifying events in the procedure, mean inter-rater agreement was low (mean agreement across pairs 47.3%). However, inter-rater reliability regarding the total number of communication failures per procedure was reasonable (mean ICC across pairs 0.72). When observers recorded the same event, a strong concordance about the type of communication failure represented by the event was found. DISCUSSION: Reasonable inter-rater reliability was shown by the instrument in assessing the relative rate of communication failures displayed per procedure. The difficulties in identifying and interpreting individual communication events reflect the delicate balance between increased subtlety and increased error. Complex team communication does not readily reduce to mere observation of events; some level of interpretation is required to meaningfully account for communicative exchanges. Although such observer interpretation improves the subtlety and validity of the instrument, it necessarily introduces error, reducing reliability. Although we continue to work towards increasing the instrument's sensitivity at the level of individual categories, this study suggests that the instrument could be used to measure the effect of team communication intervention on overall failure rates at the level of procedure.

Towards safer interprofessional communication: constructing a model of "utility" from preoperative team briefings.

"Improved team communication" is broadly advocated in the discourse on safety but rarely supported by a precise understanding of the relationship between specific communication practices and concrete improvements in collaborative work processes. We sought to improve such understanding by analyzing the discourse arising from structured preoperative team briefings among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists prior to general surgery procedures. Analysis of observers' fieldnotes from 302 briefings yielded a two-part model of communicative "utility", defined as the visible impact of communication on team awareness and behavior. "Informational utility" occurred when team awareness or knowledge was improved by provision of new information, explicit confirmation, reminders, or education. "Functional utility" represented direct communication - work connections: many briefings identified problems, prompting decision-making and follow-up actions. The crux of the model is an elaboration of the causal pathway between a specific communication practice (the team briefing), intermediary processes such as enhanced knowledge and purposeful action, and the quality and safety of collaborative care processes. Modeling this pathway is a critical step in promoting change, as it renders visible both the latent dangers present in current team communication systems and the specific ways in which altered communication patterns can impact team awareness and behaviors.

Perceptions of operating room tension across professions: building generalizable evidence and educational resources.

BACKGROUND: Effective team communication is critical in health care, yet no curriculum exists to teach it. Naturalistic research has revealed systematic patterns of tension and profession-specific interpretation of operating room team communication. Replication of these naturalistic findings in a controlled, video-based format could provide a basis for formal curricula. METHOD: Seventy-two surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists independently rated three video-based scenarios for the three professions' level of tension, responsibility for creating tension and responsibility for resolution. Data were analyzed using three-way, mixed-design analyses of variance. RESULTS: The three professions rated tension levels of the various scenarios similarly (F=1.19, ns), but rated each profession's responsibility for creating (F=2.86, p<.05) and resolving (F=1.91, p<.01) tension differently, often rating their profession as having relatively less responsibility than the others. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide an evidence base for team communications training about tension patterns, disparity of professional perspectives, and implications for team function.

Junior faculty experiences with informal mentoring.

Mentoring is one way in which new faculty can acquire the skills needed for a successful academic career. Little is known about how informal mentoring is operationalized in an academic setting. This study had two main objectives: (1) to determine if junior faculty identify as having an informal mentor(s) and to describe their informal mentoring relationships; and (2) to identify the areas in which these faculty seek career assistance and advice. The study employed a grounded theory approach. Subjects were recruited from the clinical teaching faculty and were 3-7 years into their first faculty position. Theoretical sampling was employed in which data analysis proceeded along-side data collection, and collection ceased when saturation of themes was reached. Saturation was reached at ten subjects. Data were collected by individual interviews. Four topics recurred: qualities sought in mentors, processes by which guidance is obtained, content of the guidance received and barriers. Faculty obtained guidance in two principal ways: (a) through collegial working relationships; and (b) through discussion with senior clinicians as part of the evaluative system in the department. Participants discussed the degree of mentoring they received in the areas of: career focus, orientation to the organization, transition of role from trainee to faculty and work/nonwork balance. Barriers identified included an evaluative role and conflict of interest on the mentor's part. Junior faculty identify some relationships from which they receive guidance; however, limitations in these relationships result in a lack of mentorship on career direction and on balancing career with personal life.