Are patient-centered care values as reflected in teaching scenarios really being taught when implemented by teaching faculty? A discourse analysis on an Indonesian medical school's curriculum

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>According to The Indonesian Medical Council, 2006, Indonesian competence-based medical curriculum should be oriented towards family medicine. We aimed to find out if the educational goal of patient-centered care within family medicine (comprehensive care and continuous care) were adequately transferred from the expected curriculum to implemented curriculum and teaching process.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Discourse analysis was done by 3 general practitioners of scenarios and learning objectives of an Indonesian undergraduate medical curriculum. The coders categorized those sentences into two groups: met or unmet the educational goal of patient-centered care.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Text analysis showed gaps in patient-centered care training between the scenarios and the learning objectives which were developed by both curriculum committee and the block planning groups and the way in which the material was taught. Most sentences in the scenarios were more relevant to patient-centered care while most sentences in the learning objectives were more inclined towards disease-perspectives.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>There is currently a discrepancy between expected patient-centered care values in the scenario and instructional materials that are being used.</p

How does portfolio use support self-regulated learning during general practitioner specialty training?:A qualitative focus group study

OBJECTIVES: Portfolios are used to support self-regulated learning (SRL), but the research literature is still inconclusive on their effectiveness. This study explored experiences with portfolio use among different stakeholders, to answer the research question: How does portfolio use support SRL during general practitioner (GP) specialty training? DESIGN: We used a qualitative research design, based on phenomenology. SETTING: Three of the eight training institutes of Dutch GP specialty training participated in this study. PARTICIPANTS: The three stakeholder groups that use the portfolio were included in nine homogenous focus groups: trainees (n=16), supervisors (n=16) and faculty (n=17). All participants had at least 6-month experience with portfolio use. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: SRL with(out) the portfolio, stakeholder dynamics and ambiguities. Respondents were doubtful about the learning benefits of portfolio use, as most trainees used their portfolio to 'check off' what was considered required. Stakeholder dynamics contributed to checking off behaviour in two ways. First, trainees experienced documenting learning activities to be superfluous, since the close relationship with their supervisor already supported SRL sufficiently. Second, faculty often (unintentionally) took portfolio ownership away from trainees, as they instructed trainees to deliver portfolio content that was valuable for assessment. Without ownership, trainees struggled to use the portfolio for SRL. Besides, ambiguities related to portfolio use amplified checking off behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Portfolio use did not support SRL in our setting. The multipurpose use of the portfolio (for the support of SRL and assessment) was identified as the primary obstacle. Underlying is a conflict that is often present in current medical curricula: agency versus accountability. If the support of SRL is considered a valuable and attainable purpose of portfolio use, it is important to realise that deliberate attention for this purpose is required during the design, guidance, assessment and evaluation of the portfolio

The Doctor in Literature. Volume 4. Gender and Sex

This book is the fourth of four volumes in the series The Doctor in Literature. Like the first three it is intended to serve as an indexed, annotated anthology and to bring together a total of some 1500 extracts from approximately 600 works of fiction where medical doctors appear as major or minor characters. The citations in volume 4 relate to sex and gender as these issues affect physicians and medical practice, There is a lengthy chapter discussing fictional female doctors and the perceived differences between these women and their male colleagues. Nurses (generally female) and their interactions with doctors (generally male) are discussed in three chapters. Sexual encounters between patients and doctors form the subject of the last chapter

Cognitive apprenticeship in clinical practice: can it stimulate learning in the opinion of students?

Learning in clinical practice can be characterised as situated learning because students learn by performing tasks and solving problems in an environment that reflects the multiple ways in which their knowledge will be put to use in their future professional practice. Collins et al. introduced cognitive apprenticeship as an instructional model for situated learning comprising six teaching methods to support learning: modelling, coaching, scaffolding, articulation, reflection and exploration. Another factor that is looked upon as conducive to learning in clinical practice is a positive learning climate. We explored students’ experiences regarding the learning climate and whether the cognitive apprenticeship model fits students’ experiences during clinical training. In focus group interviews, three groups of 6th-year medical students (N = 21) discussed vignettes representing the six teaching methods and the learning climate to explore the perceived occurrence of the teaching methods, related problems and possibilities for improvement. The students had experienced all six teaching methods during their clerkships. Modelling, coaching, and articulation were predominant, while scaffolding, reflection, and exploration were mainly experienced during longer clerkships and with one clinical teacher. The main problem was variability in usage of the methods, which was attributed to teachers’ lack of time and formal training. The students proposed several ways to improve the application of the teaching methods. The results suggest that the cognitive apprenticeship model is a useful model for teaching strategies in undergraduate clinical training and a valuable basis for evaluation, feedback, self-assessment and faculty development of clinical teachers

Combining a leadership course and multi-source feedback has no effect on leadership skills of leaders in postgraduate medical education. An intervention study with a control group

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Leadership courses and multi-source feedback are widely used developmental tools for leaders in health care. On this background we aimed to study the additional effect of a leadership course following a multi-source feedback procedure compared to multi-source feedback alone especially regarding development of leadership skills over time.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Study participants were consultants responsible for postgraduate medical education at clinical departments. Study design: pre-post measures with an intervention and control group. The intervention was participation in a seven-day leadership course. Scores of multi-source feedback from the consultants responsible for education and respondents (heads of department, consultants and doctors in specialist training) were collected before and one year after the intervention and analysed using Mann-Whitney's U-test and Multivariate analysis of variances.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no differences in multi-source feedback scores at one year follow up compared to baseline measurements, either in the intervention or in the control group (p = 0.149).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The study indicates that a leadership course following a MSF procedure compared to MSF alone does not improve leadership skills of consultants responsible for education in clinical departments. Developing leadership skills takes time and the time frame of one year might have been too short to show improvement in leadership skills of consultants responsible for education. Further studies are needed to investigate if other combination of initiatives to develop leadership might have more impact in the clinical setting.</p

The effect of distractions in the operating room during endourological procedures

Contains fulltext : 98421.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: Professionals working in the operating room (OR) are subject to various distractions that can be detrimental to their task performance and the quality of their work. This study aimed to quantify the frequency, nature, and effect on performance of (potentially) distracting events occurring during endourological procedures and additionally explored urologists' and residents' perspectives on experienced ill effects due to distracting factors. METHODS: First, observational data were collected prospectively during endourological procedures in one OR of a teaching hospital. A seven-point ordinal scale was used to measure the level of observed interference with the main task of the surgical team. Second, semistructured interviews were conducted with eight urologists and seven urology residents in two hospitals to obtain their perspectives on the impact of distracting factors. RESULTS: Seventy-eight procedures were observed. A median of 20 distracting events occurred per procedure, which corresponds to an overall rate of one distracting event every 1.8 min. Equipment problems and procedure-related and medically irrelevant communication were the most frequently observed causes of interruptions and identified as the most distracting factors in the interviews. Occurrence of distracting factors in difficult situations requiring high levels of concentration was perceived by all interviewees as disturbing and negatively impacting performance. The majority of interviewees (13/15) thought distracting factors impacted more strongly on residents' compared to urologists' performance due to their different levels of experience. CONCLUSION: Distracting events occur frequently in the OR. Equipment problems and communication, the latter both procedure-related and medically irrelevant, have the largest impact on the sterile team and regularly interrupt procedures. Distracting stimuli can influence performance negatively and should therefore be minimized. Further research is required to determine the direct effect of distraction on patient safety

Combined student ratings and self-assessment provide useful feedback for clinical teachers

Many evaluation instruments have been developed to provide feedback to physicians on their clinical teaching but written feedback alone is not always effective. We explored whether feedback effectiveness improved when teachers’ self-assessment was added to written feedback based on student ratings. 37 physicians (10 residents, 27 attending physicians) from different specialties (Internal Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics/Gynecology, Pediatrics, Neurology, Dermatology, Ophthalmology, ENT, and Psychiatry) were invited to fill out a self-assessment questionnaire on their teaching skills. Students completed an almost identical questionnaire to evaluate the same teachers based on their experiences during clerkships. After receiving written feedback incorporating their self-assessment and the student ratings, the teachers indicated their perceptions of the self-assessment exercise and the written feedback in a questionnaire (five-point Likert scale items) and next, in more detail, in semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 12 of the participating teachers. 25 physicians participated (67%). The results showed that self-assessment and student feedback were both perceived as useful (3.7, SD 1.0) but the latter was considered more effective. The physicians we interviewed considered the combination of self-assessment with student ratings more effective than either self-assessment or written feedback alone. Notably, discrepancies between student ratings and self-assessment were deemed a strong incentive for change. We conclude that self-assessment can be a useful tool to stimulate improvement of clinical teaching when it is combined with written feedback based on student ratings. Future research among larger groups is needed to confirm our findings and examine whether these combined tools actually lead to improved teaching