Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Diagnosing and Remediating Clinical Reasoning Difficulties: A Faculty Development Workshop.
Weinstein, Adam; Gupta, Shanu; Pinto-Powell, Roshini; Jackson, Jennifer; Appel, Joel; Roussel, Danielle; Daniel, Michelle.
Afiliación
  • Weinstein A; Assistant Professor, Pediatrics and Medical Education, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth.
  • Gupta S; Assistant Professor, Internal Medicine, Rush Medical College of Rush University Medical Center.
  • Pinto-Powell R; Associate Professor, Internal Medicine and Medical Education, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth.
  • Jackson J; Associate Professor, Pediatrics, Wake Forest School of Medicine of Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center.
  • Appel J; Assistant Professor, Internal Medicine, Wayne State University School of Medicine.
  • Roussel D; Associate Professor, Anesthesiology, University of Utah School of Medicine.
  • Daniel M; Assistant Professor, Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School.
MedEdPORTAL ; 13: 10650, 2017 11 06.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30800851
ABSTRACT

Introduction:

Clinical reasoning is a complex cognitive process that involves multiple steps. Diagnosing and remediating clinical reasoning difficulties requires faculty to have an understanding of the cognitive theory behind clinical reasoning, familiarity with terminology, and a framework to identify different domains of struggle in their learners. Published resources on faculty development to diagnose and remediate clinical reasoning difficulties are limited. We created and implemented a workshop to assist faculty in developing these skills based on the five-domain framework described by Audétat, Laurin, and Sanche. This workshop provides all the materials needed to replicate this training with faculty at other institutions.

Methods:

The workshop consists of a didactic component and case-based active learning in small groups. Each case focuses on different domains of clinical reasoning difficulties and targets different learner levels (preclinical medical students through residents). The workshop was given in multiple venues in 2016 and 2017.

Results:

Participants reported the session was valuable (4.71/5.0), the facilitators were effective (4.5/5.0), and the objectives were met (4.28/5.0). They highlighted the strengths of the interactive format, the framework to diagnose and remediate clinical reasoning difficulties, and the excellent take-home resources. They suggested more time for the workshop, revision of cases to better highlight difficulties, and refinement of instructions to approach the cases. These suggestions were incorporated into the current iteration of the workshop.

Discussion:

We successfully implemented a workshop for diagnosing and remediating clinical reasoning difficulties in multiple venues. The sessions were diverse in terms of faculty participants and learner groups addressed.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Solución de Problemas / Competencia Clínica / Docentes Médicos Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: MedEdPORTAL Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Solución de Problemas / Competencia Clínica / Docentes Médicos Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: MedEdPORTAL Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article