Association Between 6-Week Postdischarge Risk Classification and 12-Month Outcomes After Orthopedic Trauma.

Importance: Numerous studies have demonstrated that long-term outcomes after orthopedic trauma are associated with psychosocial and behavioral health factors evident early in the patient's recovery. Little is known about how to identify clinically actionable subgroups within this population. Objectives: To examine whether risk and protective factors measured at 6 weeks after injury could classify individuals into risk clusters and evaluate whether these clusters explain variations in 12-month outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective observational study was conducted between July 16, 2013, and January 15, 2016, among 352 patients with severe orthopedic injuries at 6 US level I trauma centers. Statistical analysis was conducted from October 9, 2017, to July 13, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: At 6 weeks after discharge, patients completed standardized measures for 5 risk factors (pain intensity, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, alcohol abuse, and tobacco use) and 4 protective factors (resilience, social support, self-efficacy for return to usual activity, and self-efficacy for managing the financial demands of recovery). Latent class analysis was used to classify participants into clusters, which were evaluated against measures of function, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and self-rated health collected at 12 months. Results: Among the 352 patients (121 women and 231 men; mean [SD] age, 37.6 [12.5] years), latent class analysis identified 6 distinct patient clusters as the optimal solution. For clinical use, these clusters can be collapsed into 4 groups, sorted from low risk and high protection (best) to high risk and low protection (worst). All outcomes worsened across the 4 clinical groupings. Bayesian analysis shows that the mean Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment dysfunction scores at 12 months differed by 7.8 points (95% CI, 3.0-12.6) between the best and second groups, by 10.3 points (95% CI, 1.6-20.2) between the second and third groups, and by 18.4 points (95% CI, 7.7-28.0) between the third and worst groups. Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrates that during early recovery, patients with orthopedic trauma can be classified into risk and protective clusters that account for a substantial amount of the variance in 12-month functional and health outcomes. Early screening and classification may allow a personalized approach to postsurgical care that conserves resources and targets appropriate levels of care to more patients.

Two-Year Experience Implementing a Curriculum to Improve Residents' Patient-Centered Communication Skills.

OBJECTIVES: Surgery milestones from The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education have encouraged a focus on training and assessment of residents' nontechnical skills, including communication. We describe our 2-year experience implementing a simulation-based curriculum, results of annual communication performance assessments, and resident evaluations. DESIGN: Eight quarterly modules were conducted on various communication topics. Former patient volunteers served as simulation participants (SP) who completed annual assessments using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT). During these 2 modules, communication skills were assessed in the following standardized scenarios: (1) delivering bad news to a caregiver of a patient with postoperative intracerebral hemorrhage and (2) primary care gallstone referral with contraindications for cholecystectomy. SP-CAT ratings were evaluated for correlations by individual and associations with trainee and SP characteristics. Surgical patient experience surveys are evaluated during the curriculum. SETTING: Independent academic medical center surgical simulation center. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five surgery residents per year in 2015 to 2017. RESULTS: Residents have practiced skills in a variety of scenarios including bad news delivery, medical error disclosure, empathic communication, and end-of-life conversations. Residents report positive learning experiences from the curriculum (90% graded all modules A/A+). Confidence ratings rose following each module (p < 0.001) and in the second year (p < 0.001). Annual assessments yielded insights into skills level, and relationships to resident confidence levels and traits. Communication scores were not associated with resident gender or postgraduate year. Over the course of the curriculum implementation, surgical patients have reported that doctors provided explanations with improved clarity (p = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: The simulation-based SP-CAT has shown initial evidence of usability, content validity, relationships to observed communication behaviors and residents' skills confidence. Evaluations of different scenarios may not be correlated for individuals over time. The communication curriculum paralleled improvements in patient experience concerning surgeons' clear explanations. An ongoing surgery resident communication curriculum has numerous educational, assessment, and institutional benefits.

Talk the Talk: Implementing a Communication Curriculum for Surgical Residents.

OBJECTIVES: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education milestones provide a framework of specific interpersonal and communication skills that surgical trainees should aim to master. However, training and assessment of resident nontechnical skills remains challenging. We aimed to develop and implement a curriculum incorporating interactive learning principles such as group discussion and simulation-based scenarios to formalize instruction in patient-centered communication skills, and to identify best practices when building such a program. DESIGN: The curriculum is presented in quarterly modules over a 2-year cycle. Using our surgical simulation center for the training, we focused on proven strategies for interacting with patients and other providers. We trained and used former patients as standardized participants (SPs) in communication scenarios. SETTING: Surgical simulation center in a 900-bed tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Program learners were general surgery residents (postgraduate year 1-5). Trauma Survivors Network volunteers served as SPs in simulation scenarios. RESULTS: We identified several important lessons: (1) designing and implementing a new curriculum is a challenging process with multiple barriers and complexities; (2) several readily available facilitators can ease the implementation process; (3) with the right approach, learners, faculty, and colleagues are enthusiastic and engaged participants; (4) learners increasingly agree that communication skills can be improved with practice and appreciate the curriculum value; (5) patient SPs can be valuable members of the team; and importantly (6) the culture of patient-physician communication appears to shift with the implementation of such a curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach using Trauma Survivors Network volunteers as SPs could be reproduced in other institutions with similar programs. Faculty enthusiasm and support is strong, and learner participation is active. Continued focus on patient and family communication skills would enhance patient care for institutions providing such education as well as for institutions where residents continue on in fellowships or begin their surgical practice.

Assessment of Surgery Residents' Interpersonal Communication Skills: Validation Evidence for the Communication Assessment Tool in a Simulation Environment.

OBJECTIVES: Although development of trainees' competency in interpersonal communication is essential to high-quality patient-centered surgical care, nontechnical skills present assessment challenges for residency program directors. The Communication Assessment Tool (CAT) demonstrated internal reliability and content validity for general surgery residents, though the tool has not yet been applied in simulation. The study provides validation evidence for using the CAT to assess surgical residents' interpersonal communication skills in simulation scenarios. DESIGN: Simulations of delivering bad news were completed by 21 general surgery residents during a mandatory communication curriculum. Upon completion of the 10-minute scenario, standardized participants (SPs) assessed performance using the 14-item CAT rating scale and individually provided feedback to residents. Discrete communication behaviors were recorded on video review by a trained blinded observer. The traits emotional intelligence questionnaire short form (TEIQue-SF) was completed by the residents 6 months later. SP-CAT ratings are evaluated with respect to learner characteristics, observed behaviors, and TEIQue results. SETTING: Surgical simulation center in a 900-bed tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: General surgery residents were targeted learners. Trauma survivors network volunteers served as SPs, acting as a family member of a patient who developed an intracerebral hemorrhage following a small bowel procedure. RESULTS: Discrete communication behaviors were reliably assessed by the observer (interrater reliability with trainer: 89% agreement, κ = 0.77). SP-CAT ratings ranged from 34 to 61. Higher SP-CAT ratings were correlated with positive communication behaviors (Spearman ρ = 0.42, p = 0.056). Total TEIQue was positively related to SP-CAT ratings (ρ = 0.42, p = 0.061). The TEIQue emotionality factor was strongly correlated with SP-CAT ratings (ρ = 0.52, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: The CAT demonstrates content validity in a simulation environment with former patients acting as SPs. This study provides validation evidence relating the SP-CAT to discrete observations of communication behaviors by a trained, reliable observer as well as residents' self-reported emotional intelligence traits.