Real patient learning integrated in a preclinical block musculoskeletal disorders. Does it make a difference?

Although musculoskeletal disorders are the most common reason for general practitioner visits, training did not keep pace. Implementation of learning from patients with rheumatologic disorders linked together with the teaching of theoretical knowledge in the preclinical medical education might be an important step forward in the improvement of quality of care for these patients. The Leiden Medical School curriculum has implemented two non-obligatory real patient learning (RPL) practicals integrated within the preclinical block musculoskeletal disorders. This study investigates the educational effectiveness of the practicals, the expectations students have of RPL, and students’ satisfaction. Participants’ grades on the end-of-block test served as the test results of the educational effectiveness of the practicals and were compared with those of the non-participants. Qualitative data was collected by means of questionnaires generated by focus groups. The participants in practicals scored significantly higher at the end-of-block test. The expected effects of the contact with real patients concerned positive effects on cognition and skills. ‘Contextualizing of the theory’, ‘better memorizing of clinical pictures’, and ‘understanding of the impact of the disease’ were the most frequently mentioned effects of the practicals. Overall, the participants were (very) enthusiastic about this educational format. The RPL practicals integrated within a preclinical block musculoskeletal disorders are a valuable addition to the Leiden medical curriculum. This relatively limited intervention exhibits a strong effect on students’ performance in tests. Future research should be directed towards the long-term effects of this intervention

Faculty verbal evaluations reveal strategies used to promote medical student performance

Background: Preceptors rarely follow medical students’ developing clinical performance over time and across disciplines. This study analyzes preceptors’ descriptions of longitudinal integrated clerkship (LIC) students’ clinical development and their identification of strategies to guide students’ progress. Methods: We used a common evaluation framework, reporter-interpreter-manager-educator, to guide multidisciplinary LIC preceptors’ discussions of students’ progress. We conducted thematic analysis of transcripts from preceptors’ (seven longitudinal ambulatory preceptors per student) quarterly group discussions of 15 students’ performance over one year. Results: All students’ clinical development progressed, although most experienced obstacles. Lack of structure in the history and physical exam commonly obstructed progression. Preceptors used templates for data gathering, and modeling or experiences in the inpatient setting to provide time and solidify structure. To advance students’ knowledge acquisition, many preceptors identified focused learning topics with their students; to promote application of knowledge, preceptors used reasoning strategies to teach the steps involved in synthesizing clinical data. Preceptors shared accountability for helping students advance as the LIC allowed them to follow students’ response to teaching strategies. Discussion: These results depict preceptors’ perceptions of LIC students’ developmental continuum and illustrate how multidisciplinary preceptors can use a common evaluation framework to identify strategies to improve performance and follow students’ performance longitudinally

Learning physical examination skills outside timetabled training sessions: what happens and why?

Lack of published studies on students’ practice behaviour of physical examination skills outside timetabled training sessions inspired this study into what activities medical students undertake to improve their skills and factors influencing this. Six focus groups of a total of 52 students from Years 1–3 using a pre-established interview guide. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using qualitative methods. The interview guide was based on questionnaire results; overall response rate for Years 1–3 was 90% (n = 875). Students report a variety of activities to improve their physical examination skills. On average, students devote 20% of self-study time to skill training with Year 1 students practising significantly more than Year 3 students. Practice patterns shift from just-in-time learning to a longitudinal selfdirected approach. Factors influencing this change are assessment methods and simulated/real patients. Learning resources used include textbooks, examination guidelines, scientific articles, the Internet, videos/DVDs and scoring forms from previous OSCEs. Practising skills on fellow students happens at university rooms or at home. Also family and friends were mentioned to help. Simulated/real patients stimulated students to practise of physical examination skills, initially causing confusion and anxiety about skill performance but leading to increased feelings of competence. Difficult or enjoyable skills stimulate students to practise. The strategies students adopt to master physical examination skills outside timetabled training sessions are self-directed. OSCE assessment does have influence, but learning takes place also when there is no upcoming assessment. Simulated and real patients provide strong incentives to work on skills. Early patient contacts make students feel more prepared for clinical practice

STORIES Statement: publication standards for healthcare education evidence synthesis

Fully copy of the STORIES statement - a checklist of reporting guidance for health education evidence synthesis Structured approach for Reporting In health education of Evidence Synthesis Background Evidence synthesis techniques in healthcare education have been enhanced through the activities of experts in the field and the Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) collaborative. Despite this, significant heterogeneity in techniques and reporting of healthcare education systematic review still exist and limit the usefulness of such reports. The aim of this project was to produce the STORIES (STructured apprOach to the Reporting In healthcare education of Evidence Synthesis) statement to offer a guide for reporting evidence synthesis in health education for use by authors and journal editors. Methods A review of existing published evidence synthesis consensus statements was undertaken. A modified Delphi process was used. In stage one, expert participants were asked to state whether common existing items identified were relevant, to suggest relevant texts and specify any items they feel should be included. The results were analysed and a second stage commenced where all synthesised items were presented and participants asked to state whether they should be included or amend as needed. After further analysis, the full statement was sent for final review and comment. Results Nineteen experts participated in the panel from 35 invitations. Thirteen text sources were proposed, six existing items amended and twelve new items synthesised. After stage two, 25 amended consensus items were proposed for inclusion. The final statement contains several items unique to this context, including description of relevant conceptual frameworks or theoretical constructs, description of qualitative methodologies with rationale for their choice and presenting the implications for educators in practice of the results obtained. Conclusions An international expert panel has agreed upon a consensus statement of 25 items for the reporting of evidence synthesis within healthcare education. This unique set of items is focused on context, rather than a specific methodology. This statement can be used for those writing for publication and reviewing such manuscripts to ensure reporting supports and best informs the wider healthcare education community

Therapeutic Potential and Challenges of Targeting Receptor Tyrosine Kinase ROR1 with Monoclonal Antibodies in B-Cell Malignancies

Based on its selective cell surface expression in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), receptor tyrosine kinase ROR1 has recently emerged as a promising target for therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). To further assess the suitability of ROR1 for targeted therapy of CLL and MCL, a panel of mAbs was generated and its therapeutic utility was investigated.A chimeric rabbit/human Fab library was generated from immunized rabbits and selected by phage display. Chimeric rabbit/human Fab and IgG1 were investigated for their capability to bind to human and mouse ROR1, to mediate antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC), and internalization, and to agonize or antagonize apoptosis using primary CLL cells from untreated patients as well as MCL cell lines. A panel of mAbs demonstrated high affinity and specificity for a diverse set of epitopes that involve all three extracellular domains of ROR1, are accessible on the cell surface, and mediate internalization. The mAb with the highest affinity and slowest rate of internalization was found to be the only mAb that mediated significant, albeit weak, ADCC. None of the mAbs mediated CDC. Alone, they did not enhance or inhibit apoptosis.Owing to its relatively low cell surface density, ROR1 may be a preferred target for armed rather than naked mAbs. Provided is a panel of fully sequenced and thoroughly characterized anti-ROR1 mAbs suitable for conversion to antibody-drug conjugates, immunotoxins, chimeric antigen receptors, and other armed mAb entities for preclinical and clinical studies

Exploring deliberate practice in medicine: how do physicians learn in the workplace?

Medical professionals need to keep on learning as part of their everyday work to deliver high-quality health care. Although the importance of physicians’ learning is widely recognized, few studies have investigated how they learn in the workplace. Based on insights from deliberate practice research, this study examined the activities physicians engage in during their work that might further their professional development. As deliberate practice requires a focused effort to improve performance, the study also examined the goals underlying this behaviour. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 50 internal medicine physicians: 19 residents, 18 internists working at a university hospital, and 13 working at a non-university hospital. The results showed that learning in medical practice was very much embedded in clinical work. Most relevant learning activities were directly related to patient care rather than motivated by competence improvement goals. Advice and feedback were sought when necessary to provide this care. Performance standards were tied to patients’ conditions. The patients encountered and the discussions with colleagues about patients were valued most for professional development, while teaching and updating activities were also valued in this respect. In conclusion, physicians’ learning is largely guided by practical experience rather than deliberately sought. When professionals interact in diagnosing and treating patients to achieve high-quality care, their experiences contribute to expertise development. However, much could be gained from managing learning opportunities more explicitly. We offer suggestions for increasing the focus on learning in medical practice and further research