A 7-Domain Framework That Can Bridge Clinical Care, Health Systems Science, and Health Equity: Lessons From the H&P 360.

The H&P 360 is a reconceptualized history and physical (H&P), which clinical medical students have reported reveals clinically relevant information not elicited by the traditional H&P, informs care planning, promotes interprofessional team care, and enhances patient rapport. In addition to the traditional checklist focused on patients' medical conditions, the H&P 360 includes prompts for gathering limited but critical information in 6 other domains directly relevant to patients' overall health-patient values, goals, and priorities; mental health; behavioral health; social support; living environment and resources; and function. Clinicians are thus reminded to elicit relevant information from each domain appropriate to the context of each clinical encounter. As health systems explore ways to identify and address social drivers of health, medical schools are rapidly expanding curricula beyond biomedical conditions, as reflected in the multifaceted health systems science curriculum. Many of today's medical students struggle to find connections among the core tasks of mastering biomedical clinical medicine, their evolving professional identity and career trajectory, and addressing systemic and societal barriers to population health. The authors argue that the 7-domain framework can serve as a conceptual bridge that links the care of individual patients with topics in the health systems science curriculum to promote health equity. The authors provide illustrative examples of the 7 domains as an organizing lens that can promote curiosity and understanding of seemingly disparate topics, such as interpersonal violence, social drivers of health, and structural racism, as well as help students expand and define their professional identities as physicians beyond diagnosis and treatment of biomedical conditions. The authors invite discussion and experimentation around the use of the 7-domain framework in teaching, assessment, and curriculum development and point to resources for clinical educators for teaching and measuring the effects of the H&P 360 on learners, preceptors, and patients.

Redesigning blood pressure measurement training in healthcare schools.

Blood pressure (BP) measurement is the most commonly performed procedure in clinical practice and requires mastering several skills. A prior study determined that medical school students failed to perform more than half of BP measurement skills correctly, demonstrating a need to redesign how BP measurement is taught. The American Medical Association set out to create and test a solution to address this BP measurement curricula gap. An eLearning series consisting of three modules was developed. The series was informed by evidence-based guidelines, includes content on self-measured blood pressure, is accessible to students at any time within their education journey, is interactive, and available to all healthcare schools at no cost. Prior to launch, a small pilot study was conducted with medical and nursing students to determine if these new eLearning modules address current gaps in BP measurement curricula. Students were instructed to complete an online assessment before and after viewing the main module within the series. Our results suggest that eLearning modules on BP measurement can help improve knowledge and ability to identify correct BP measurement skills. Pronounced improvements were observed in the topics of patient preparation, positioning, and cuff sizing and placement. Revisions were made to content areas where improvement was minimal. Overall, the findings revealed the importance of pilot testing a product prior to launch and while many skills may improve with an eLearning intervention, certain skills will still likely require additional in-person training with peers.

Using web-based training to improve accuracy of blood pressure measurement among health care professionals: A randomized trial.

Accurate blood pressure measurement is crucial for proper screening, diagnosis, and monitoring of high blood pressure. However, providers are not aware of proper blood pressure measurement skills, do not master all the appropriate skills, or miss key steps in the process, leading to inconsistent or inaccurate readings. Training in blood pressure measurement for most providers is usually limited to a one-time brief demonstration during professional education coursework. The American Medical Association and the American Heart Association developed a 30-minute e-Learning module designed to refresh and improve existing blood pressure measurement knowledge and clinical skills among practicing providers. One hundred seventy-seven practicing providers, which included medical assistants, nurses, advanced practice providers, and physicians, participated in a multi-site randomized educational study designed to assess the effect of this e-Learning module on blood pressure measurement knowledge and skills. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either the intervention or control group. The intervention group followed a pre-post assessment approach, and the control group followed a test-retest approach. The initial assessment showed that participants in both the intervention and control groups correctly performed less than half of the 14 skills considered necessary to obtain an accurate blood pressure measurement (mean scores 5.5 and 5.9, respectively). Following the e-Learning module, the intervention group performed on average of 3.4 more skills correctly vs 1.4 in the control group (P < .01). Our findings reinforce existing evidence that errors in provider blood pressure measurements are highly prevalent and provide novel evidence that refresher training improves measurement accuracy.

Expanding the Traditional History and Physical Examination to Address Chronic Diseases and Social Needs: A Multisite Randomized Control Trial of 4 Medical Schools.

PURPOSE: This study gathers validity evidence of an expanded History and Physical examination (H&P 360) to address chronic diseases through incorporation of biopsychosocial elements that are lacking in traditional H&P assessments via a multisite randomized controlled trial among medical students. METHOD: Third- and fourth-year medical students (n = 159) at 4 schools participated in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination designed with 2 cases for chronic disease. Students were randomized into the treatment group, which involved brief written instructions on how to use the H&P 360 followed by a standardized patient (SP) interaction, or the control group, which used the traditional H&P in an SP interaction without additional instructions. Validity evidence was gathered for content (alignment with an empirically derived expanded history list), response process (feedback from raters and learners on the process), internal structure (reliability and item-level psychometrics), relations to other variables (comparison between treatment and control groups), and consequences (survey results from learners on experience). RESULTS: H&P 360 items were blueprinted by faculty experts. SP observation checklist grading was consistent, and postassessment debrief confirmed favorable educational experience among learners. The reliability of the H&P 360 was .76. Overall mean scores on the H&P 360 content (mean = 15.96, standard deviation [SD] = 3.66) were significantly higher compared with the traditional H&P (mean = 10.99, SD = 2.69, Cohen's d = 1.17, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Medical students using the H&P 360 collected significantly more biopsychosocial information compared with students using the traditional H&P, providing empirical support for teaching and assessing biopsychosocial information. The assessment demonstrated strong validity evidence supporting the use of the H&P 360 assessment in medical schools.