Let’s talk about work: pilot study of an education program on discussing work participation with cancer patients for general practitioners in training

Background: Cancer patients report that they lack support from healthcare providers when it comes to returning to or maintaining employment. In the education of general practitioners (GPs) in the Netherlands, there is little attention given to discussing work participation with patients. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate a newly developed education program for GPs in training that focuses on discussing work participation with cancer patients. Methods: Two groups of in total twenty-one GPs in training participated in the education program. GPs were educated about the importance of discussing work participation with patients, work-related problems cancer patients can experience, and advice they can give to support cancer patients regarding work issues. In this pilot study using a mixed-method design, participants evaluated the program in two self-developed questionnaires and in a focus group discussion. Results: Seventeen participating GPs (81%) indicated that the education program was suitable for implementation in the education curriculum. Eleven participants (52%) reported that they had never discussed work participation with cancer patients before. Directly after the education program, eighteen participants (86%) reported that they planned to discuss work participation more often with their patients. Four months after the program, 67% indicated they had applied their new knowledge and skills in practice by discussing work participation and by referring cancer patients to occupational health professionals or online resources. According to the GPs in training, integrating the topic of work participation into other education for GPs in training and focusing on a broader group of patients could improve the impact of the education program. Conclusions: According to the results of this pilot study, the newly developed education program increased the awareness of GPs in training on the importance of discussing work participation with cancer patients. Future studies should focus on whether cancer patients experience more support from their GPs for maintaining and returning to employment after their GP has participated in the training program

What are the characteristics of excellent physicians and residents in the clinical workplace? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: In order to recognise and facilitate the development of excellent medical doctors (physicians and residents), it is important to first identify the characteristics of excellence. Failure to recognising excellence causes loss of talent, loss of role models and it lowers work ethos. This causes less than excellent patient care and lack of commitment to improve the healthcare system. DESIGN: Systematic review performed according to the Association for Medical Education in Europe guideline. INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched Medline, Embase, Psycinfo, ERIC and CINAHL until 14 March 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included original studies describing characteristics of excellent medical doctors, using a broad approach as to what is considered excellence. Assuming that excellence will be viewed differently depending on the interplay, and that different perspectives (peers, supervisors and patients) will add to a complete picture of the excellent medical doctor, we did not limit this review to a specific perspective. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two researchers. We used the Quality Assessment Tool for Different Designs for quality assessment. RESULTS: Eleven articles were eligible and described the characteristics from different perspectives: (1) physicians on physicians, (2) physicians on residents, (3) patients on physicians and (4) mixed group (diverse sample of participants on physicians). The included studies showed a wide range of characteristics, which could be grouped into competencies (communication, professionalism and knowledge), motivation (directed to learning and to patient care) and personality (flexibility, empathy). CONCLUSIONS: In order to define excellence of medical doctors three clusters seem important: competence, motivation and personality. This is in line with Renzulli’s model of gifted behaviour. Our work adds to this model by specifying the content of these clusters, and as such provides a basis for definition and recognition of medical excellence

What stressors and energizers do PhD students in medicine identify for their work: A qualitative inquiry

Introduction: Rising mental health issues is a global problem among PhD students. This study aimed to identify stressors and energizers in PhD work. Methods: PhD students at a university medical center were asked to describe the top three stressors and energizers in their PhD work through a survey. The narrative answers were subjected to content analysis. Results: Three hundred and eighty-six PhD students participated. We identified five overarching themes: Research is challenging, Resources can be limited, Recognizing the value of work, Experience of autonomy, and Relationships are key to success. We found positive (energizers) as well as negative (stressors) comments for each theme. Discussion: Supportive supervision with open communication has been identified in the literature as the most important contributor to PhD student well-being, while work-life imbalance has been identified as the most important reason for psychological distress. With our study, we add energizers and stressors that fit into a theoretical framework (Self-determination theory). This helps to understand the problem better and provide specific recommendations. Conclusions: Optimal challenges, resources and supervision, autonomy and good relationships at work are perceived as energizers. Challenges in research beyond capability, limitations in resources, not being valued, autonomy restriction and poor relationships at work are perceived as stressors in PhD work

What difficulties do faculty members face when conducting workplace-based assessments in undergraduate clerkships?

Abstract Objectives: Workplace-based assessments are based on the principle of providing feedback to medical students on clinical performance in authentic settings. In practice, however, the assessment often overshadows the feedback. The aim of this study was to determine what problems faculty perceived when performing workplace-based assessments and what solutions they suggested to overcome these difficulties. Methods: Discussion meetings were conducted with education coordinators and faculty (n=55) from 11 peripheral hospitals concerning the difficulties encountered when conducting workplace-based assessments. We analysed the reports from these discussion meetings using an integrated approach guided by our research questions to code the data. Two researchers analysed the data independently and resolved differences of opinion through consensus. Results: The problems perceived by faculty in workplacebased assessments (difficulties) and suggestions for improvement formed the overarching themes. Problems included the short duration of clerkships, students choosing the assessment moments, the use of grades for the miniClinical Evaluation Exercise, the difficulty in combining teacher and assessor roles and the difficulty in giving fail judgements. Suggestions for improvement included longer clerkship duration, faculty choosing the assessment moments, using a pass/fail system for the mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise and forward feeding of performance from earlier clerkships following a fail judgement. Conclusions: Our study indicates that faculty perceive difficulties when conducting workplace-based assessments. These assessments need periodical review to understand the difficulties faculty experience using them; they also require periodical feedback to ensure their proper and effective use

Digital Training Resources in the Dutch Surgical Residency Curricula and the Perspectives of Residents: A Thematic Analysis of Resident Interviews

BACKGROUND: Digital training resources show great promise in augmenting traditional surgical education – especially in times of social distancing and limited surgical caseload. Embedding digital resources in surgical curricula is however not current, nor common practice in Dutch hospitals. While the digital world has become part of a resident's everyday life, surprisingly little is known about surgical residents’ experiences and expectations towards use of digital resources for their own surgical education. This study aims to identify digital resources currently used in Dutch surgical curricula and to describe surgical residents’ perspectives towards digital education. METHODS: A series of semi-structured interviews with Dutch surgical residents were conducted until data sufficiency occurred. The interviews consisted of two parts: 1) current surgical training and implemented digital resources, and 2) future surgical training and the role of digital resources therein. All interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Sixteen surgical residents were interviewed – two out of each of the eight educational regions for surgery in the Netherlands. Five digital resource categories were identified and four general educational themes (requirements, advantages, disadvantages, and general education themes), overarching 13 sub-themes. In general, residents were enthusiastic with regard to using digital resources, especially when the perceived advantages supported their autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: Dutch surgical residents indicate that digital resources may support their educational experiences, but state that ideally they must be combined with much appreciated on-the-job training, and be offered to them tailored to their individual needs. No resources are considered to be a “magic bullet” in itself. The specific needs of residents and educators need to be addressed clearly in order to successfully adopt and implement digital resources on a larger scale

‘One size does not fit all’: The value of person-centred analysis in health professions education research

© 2020, The Author(s).Health professions education (HPE) research is dominated by variable-centred analysis, which enables the exploration of relationships between different independent and dependent variables in a study. Although the results of such analysis are interesting, an effort to conduct a more person-centred analysis in HPE research can help us in generating a more nuanced interpretation of the data on the variables involved in teaching and learning. The added value of using person-centred analysis, next to variable-centred analysis, lies in what it can bring to the applications of the research findings in educational practice. Research findings of person-centred analysis can facilitate the development of more personalized learning or remediation pathways and customization of teaching and supervision efforts. Making the research findings more recognizable in practice can make it easier for teachers and supervisors to understand and deal with students. The aim of this article is to compare and contrast different methods that can be used for person-centred analysis and show the incremental value of such analysis in HPE research. We describe three methods for conducting person-centred analysis: cluster, latent class and Q‑sort analyses, along with their advantages and disadvantage with three concrete examples for each method from HPE research studies

Distinguishing Three Unprofessional Behavior Profiles of Medical Students Using Latent Class Analysis

Purpose Because unprofessional behavior of physicians is associated with unprofessional behavior in medical school, identifying unprofessional behavior in medical school is critical. Research has noted the difficulty in assessing professional behavior. Instead of identifying isolated behaviors, it could be more helpful to recognize behavioral patterns to evaluate students’ professional behavior. The authors aimed to identify patterns in the unprofessional behaviors of medical students and to construct descriptions based on these patterns. Method Content analysis of research articles yielded a template of unprofessional behaviors for coding student evaluation forms indicating unsatisfactory professional behavior, collected from 2012 to 2014 at the VUmc School of Medical Sciences, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Latent class analysis was used to identify classes of students with a high chance of displaying comparable unprofessional behaviors. Teachers’ feedback of prototype students was summarized to generate profile descriptions. Results A template of 109 behaviors was used to code 232 evaluation forms of 194 students (3.9% students/year). Latent class analysis identified three hypothetical classes of students: Class 1 (43%) was labeled as “Poor reliability,” class 2 (20%) was labeled as “Poor reliability and poor insight,” and class 3 (37%) was labeled as “Poor reliability, poor insight, and poor adaptability.” Conclusions These profiles of unprofessional behavior might help to improve the evaluation of unprofessional behavior in medical school. Further research should provide evidence for confidently accepting or rejecting the profiles as an instrument to identify which students are expected to benefit from remediation trajectories