A focused curriculum in surgical oncology for the third-year medical students

Integration of Radiation Oncology Into the Preclinical Curriculum Through Problem-Based Learning

PURPOSE

Early exposure to oncology care during the preclinical years of medical school may translate to increased student interest in oncology-related fields and improved understanding of oncologic treatment modalities, including radiation oncology. Many schools incorporate problem-based learning (PBL) into the medical school curriculum; this is an opportunity to immerse students in oncologic case management. We describe the effective incorporation of one course into the medical school curriculum that may be replicated at other institutions.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A PBL case regarding pancreatic cancer was created by a radiation oncology resident and faculty member in collaboration with the gastrointestinal course director for first-year medical students at a single institution. Pancreatic cancer was chosen based on curricular needs. Learning objectives were discussed to guide the creation of the case.

RESULTS

All 140 first-year medical students participated in the 1-hour small group case focused on oncologic work up, multidisciplinary care, and radiation therapy concepts. Students were provided with a case prompt and resources to review prior to the PBL session. Volunteer radiation oncology facilitators attended a 30-minute educational meeting and were provided a detailed case guide 1 week before the PBL session. During the PBL case, facilitators guided students to achieve desired learning objectives. Among the 76 (54%) medical students who completed an optional post-PBL survey, the majority reported that the case motivated them to learn more about oncology (89%) and radiation oncology (82%). There was an increase in the number of subscribers to the Oncology Interest Group (43% increase from previous year) and preclinical students shadowing in the radiation oncology department. The PBL case was continued in future years for all first-year students and extended to 2 hours to promote additional discussion in response to student and facilitator feedback.

CONCLUSIONS

A cancer-specific PBL case facilitated by radiation oncology educators is an effective avenue to integrate radiation oncology into the preclinical curriculum and stimulate interest in oncology among first-year medical students.

A Virtual Curriculum to Increase Exposure to Oncologic Subspecialties for Undergraduate Medical Students

Medical student exposure to oncology is imperative given the prevalence of cancer, growing need for survivorship care, and ever-evolving therapies. Our institution offers a Cancer Care Elective for undergraduate medical students focused on clinical shadowing, but the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated completely redesigning a virtual alternative. In this study, we utilize a post-elective survey to 1) assess whether the novel virtual elective effectively promoted student learning and 2) identify which components were most impactful. We created an entirely virtual, semester-long course with structured mentorship, subspecialty panels, physician-led didactics, and patient exposure. Students attended multidisciplinary tumor boards and presented on oncologic topics. A post-elective survey assessed the course's impact on students' knowledge and the perceived value of each elective component. Of the 29 enrolled students, 12 responded to our survey (41%). Most students reported that the elective highly enhanced their understanding of medical (67%), surgical (75%), and pediatric (66%) oncology. The highest rated didactic involved patients discussing their cancer journeys, with 80% of students reporting that this session enhanced their understanding of patient-physician collaboration. Students reported that physician mentorship helped them better understand oncology (90%) and promoted interest in pursuing an oncologic career (100%). This study demonstrates that our virtual Cancer Care Elective was effective at increasing student understanding of oncology in practice. The results also suggest that patient exposure and physician mentorship are particularly educational and encouraging.

A Thorough Analysis of the Current State of Cancer Education in Medical Schools and Application of Experimental Teaching Techniques and Their Efficacy

Newly diagnosed cases of cancer are expected to double by the year 2040. Although many different oncology teaching initiatives have been implemented, many students continue to report uncertainty when dealing with patients with cancer. Through this review, we aim to find the most effective teaching methods to better prepare future physicians. Papers studying different methods of teaching oncology were identified through a thorough review of specific electronic databases. Each study was analyzed and sorted into one of ten unique categories created by the authors specifically for this review. If portions of the study fit into multiple categories, relevant results would be analyzed in all applicable areas. Additionally, papers were separated and analyzed by country of origin, preclinical or clinical interventional basis, and quantitative versus qualitative form of statistical analysis. A total of 115 papers from 26 different countries and regions were included in the final analysis. 91.4% of papers analyzing Lecture and Small Group Discussions indicated a positive impact. 97.1% of papers analyzing Clinical Practice and Simulation indicated a positive impact. 100% of papers analyzing Early Experience and Mentorship, Summer Programs and Voluntary Electives, use of Multidisciplinary Teams, and Role Play stated that these methods had a positive impact. 50% of papers analyzing Computer/Web Based Programs indicated a positive impact. Clinical Practice and Simulation, Role Play, Summer/Elective Programs and interventions involving Multidisciplinary Team Work all appeared to be most effective. Intensive Block Programs, Didactic Lectures/Small Group Discussions, and Computer/Web Based Education tools as a whole were variable. General Review papers showed continued variability in domestic and international oncology curricula. Incorporation of effective teaching interventions should be highly considered in the future creation of standardized oncology curricula in order to best prepare the next generation of physicians. Future studies could explore the differing efficacies of teaching interventions in the postgraduate versus graduate realms.

A Delphi consensus study for teaching "Basic Trauma Management" to third-year medical students

Background

The Basic-Trauma Management (BTM) course has been taught to third-year medical students in small groups for many years without substantial changes. With the introduction of a new curriculum for Swiss medical students, it was necessary to revise the BTM content and re-align it. Our aim was to identify core competencies for the revised BTM course.

Methods

We applied a three-round step-wise Delphi consensus. First, we asked open-ended questions on what were the most important competencies to be taught for BTM; the second round used Likert scales to ensure agreement on the competencies; and the final round reached out for consensus on these BTM competencies. Stakeholders were selected based on their long-standing experience in teaching BTM and in managing trauma patients.

Results

Consensus was found on 29 competencies out of an initial 130 proposals. “Human Factors”, which had not been taught previously, scored relatively high, at 22%. The sole specific trauma skill agreed upon was the use of tourniquets.

Conclusions

This is an example of curricular revision of a clinical skills course after the introduction of a regulatory framework for undergraduate medical education. The revised course curriculum tailors the concepts and skills in trauma that fulfill stakeholder needs, and are in agreement with the new Swiss learning outcomes.

Novel Approaches To Undergraduate Oncology Education

With the increasing incidence of cancer and related survival, junior doctors are more commonly involved the management of oncology patients. A comprehensive oncology curriculum has been developed and adopted across medi-cal schools in Australia. However, it was not designed to inform how medical students should be taught, and whether curriculum content translates to knowledge and competency can depend on its implementation. We have conducted a literature review of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases to identify and summarise the evidence for novel approaches to delivering the undergraduate oncology curriculum. Numerous effective approaches have been developed across areas of prevention, clinical examination through simulation, the multidisciplinary team, psycho-oncology, palliative care and even research. There is growing focus on a holistic and multidisciplinary approach to cancer education although direct clinical exposure and interactions with cancer patients is still crucial. Medical schools may also have an under-recognised role in promoting positive health behaviour if their graduates are to convey these preventative measures to their patients. Application of such methods relies upon clinicians and medical educators to consider the practicability and relevance of specific implementation in their local context.

Objective Evaluation of a Didactic Curriculum for the Radiation Oncology Medical Student Clerkship

PURPOSE

A structured didactic radiation oncology clerkship curriculum for medical students is in use at multiple academic medical centers. Objective evidence supporting this educational approach over the traditional clerkship model is lacking. This study evaluated the curriculum efficacy using an objective knowledge assessment.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Medical students received the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group (ROECSG) curriculum consisting of 3 lectures (Overview of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Biology/Physics, and Practical Aspects of Simulation/Radiation Emergencies) and a radiation oncology treatment-planning workshop. A standardized 20-item multiple choice question (MCQ) knowledge assessment was completed pre- and post-curriculum and approximately 6 months after receiving the curriculum.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-six students at 22 academic medical centers completed the ROECSG curriculum from July to November 2016. One hundred nine students completed pre- and post-clerkship MCQ knowledge assessments (response rate 74.7%). Twenty-four students reported a prior rotation at a ROECSG institution and were excluded from analysis. Mean assessment scores increased from pre- to post-curriculum (63.9% vs 80.2%, P < .01). Mean MCQ knowledge subdomain assessment scores all improved post-curriculum (t test, P values < .01). Post-scores for students rotating de novo at ROECSG institutions (n = 30) were higher compared with pre-scores for students with ≥1 prior rotations at non-ROECSG institutions (n = 55) (77.3% vs 68.8%, P = .01), with an effect size of 0.8. Students who completed rotations at ROECSG institutions continued to demonstrate a trend toward improved performance on the objective knowledge assessment at approximately 6 months after curriculum exposure (70.5% vs 65.6%, P = .11).

CONCLUSIONS

Objective evaluation of a structured didactic curriculum for the radiation oncology clerkship at early and late time points demonstrated significant improvement in radiation oncology knowledge. Students who completed clerkships at ROECSG institutions performed objectively better than students who completed clerkships at non-ROECSG institutions. These results support including a structured didactic curriculum as a standard component of the radiation oncology clerkship.

Cultivating Interest in Oncology Through a Medical Student Oncology Society

The purpose of this descriptive analysis is to describe a formal method to foster interest in oncology among medical students through a Student Oncology Society (SOS). The SOS is a student-run multidisciplinary interest group that offers oncology-related events to interested medical students at the Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM). We employed a student survey to document the impact of the SOS on student interest in careers in oncology and students' perceived accessibility of mentors in oncology at our institution. All 35 students who attended the event reported that they found the discussion panels "valuable" or "somewhat valuable." A minority of students reported that student and faculty were "somewhat accessible" or "very accessible." At the end of the survey, 37 % of the students reported that a discussion of career paths of various physicians or a student/resident panel on oncology would be beneficial. By giving students an opportunity to learn about the different medical and surgical specialties within oncology, the SOS is able to cultivate early interest and understanding of the field of oncology among pre-clinical medical students. Further work must be done to connect medical students to faculty mentors in oncology. Although this short report provides a model for other medical schools to begin their own student oncology interest groups, further rigorous evaluation of pre-clinical oncology education initiatives are necessary in order to document their long-term impact on medical education.

Educational Impact of a Structured Radiation Oncology Clerkship Curriculum: An Interinstitutional Comparison

PURPOSE

Many medical school clerkships have structured curricula; however, most radiation oncology clerkships do not. The Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group (ROECSG) implemented a curriculum for fourth-year radiation oncology clerkships at 14 institutions. We hypothesized that students completing clerkships with the curriculum would report greater subjective knowledge and comfort to function as a radiation oncology resident compared with students completing clerkships without the curriculum.

METHODS

The ROECSG curriculum included three 1-hour lectures and a 1-hour hands-on radiation treatment planning workshop. Applicants to a single radiation oncology residency program in the 2014-2015 academic year were sent an anonymous, validated clerkship experience survey. Students indicated if clerkships were completed at a curriculum site. Likert-type data (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely) are reported as median (interquartile range).

RESULTS

Respondents described 276 clerkship experiences, of which 64 (23.2%) were completed at a curriculum site. Students whose first clerkship was at a curriculum site perceived greater postclerkship confidence in knowledge of radiation biology (3 [3-4] versus 2 [2-3], P < .01), treatment setup/positioning (3 [2-3] versus 2 [2-3], P < .05), treatment planning (3 [2-3] versus 2 [2-3], P < .01), and ability to integrate evidence-based medicine into treatment (4 [2-4] versus 3 [2-4], P < .05). Students who completed any clerkship with the curriculum had greater postclerkship confidence to function as a radiation oncology resident (3 [3-4] versus 3 [2-3], P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the curriculum's ability to increase student knowledge in radiation oncology, especially in the students' first clerkship. Further, these findings suggest that expanded implementation of such curricula may ensure a rewarding educational experience during radiation oncology clerkships.

Medical Student--Reported Outcomes of a Radiation Oncologist--Led Preclinical Course in Oncology: A Five-Year Analysis

PURPOSE

There is a recognized need for more robust training in oncology for medical students. At our institution, we have offered a core dedicated oncology block, led by a radiation oncologist course director, during the second year of the medical school curriculum since the 2008-2009 academic year. Herein, we report the outcomes of the oncology block over the past 5 years through an analysis of student perceptions of the course, both immediately after completion of the block and in the third year.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We analyzed 2 separate surveys. The first assessed student impressions of how well the course met each of the course's learning objectives through a survey that was administered to students immediately after the oncology block in 2012. The second was administered after students completed the oncology block during the required radiology clerkship in the third year. All questions used a 5-level Likert scale and were analyzed by use of a Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

Of the 169 students who took the oncology course in 2012, 127 (75.1%) completed the course feedback survey. Over 73% of students agreed or strongly agreed that the course met its 3 learning objectives. Of the 699 medical students who took the required radiology clerkship between 2010 and 2013, 538 participated in the second survey, for a total response rate of 77%. Of these students, 368 (68.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that the course was effective in contributing to their overall medical education.

CONCLUSION

Student perceptions of the oncology block are favorable and have improved across multiple categories since the inception of the course. Students self-reported that a dedicated preclinical oncology block was effective in helping identify the basics of cancer therapy and laying the foundation for clinical electives in oncology, including radiation oncology.

Mapping the future: towards oncology curriculum reform in undergraduate medical education at a Canadian medical school

PURPOSE

To evaluate (1) the quantity and quality of current undergraduate oncology teaching at a major Canadian medical school; and (2) curricular changes over the past decade, to enhance local oncology education and provide insight for other educators.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Relevant 2011-2012 undergraduate curricular sessions were extracted from the University of Toronto curriculum mapping database using keywords and database identifiers. Educational sessions were analyzed according to Medical Council of Canada objectives, discussion topics, instructor qualifications, teaching format, program year, and course subject. Course-related oncology research projects performed by students during 2000 to 2012 were extracted from another internal database. Elective choices of clerks during 2008-2014 were retrieved from the institution. The 2011-2012 and 2000-2001 curricula were compared using common criteria.

RESULTS

The 2011-2012 curriculum covers 5 major themes (public health, cancer biology, diagnosis, principles of care, and therapy), which highlight 286 oncology teaching topics within 80 sessions. Genitourinary (10, 12.5%), gynecologic (8, 10.0%), and gastrointestinal cancers (7.9, 9.8%) were the most commonly taught cancers. A minority of sessions were taught by surgical oncologists (6.5, 8.1%), medical oncologists (2.5, 3.1%), and radiation oncologists (1, 1.2%). During 2000-2012, 9.0% of students (233 of 2578) opted to complete an oncology research project. During 2008-2014, oncology electives constituted 2.2% of all clerkship elective choices (209 of 9596). Compared with pre-2001 curricula, the 2012 oncology curriculum shows notable expansion in the coverage of epidemiology (6:1 increase), prevention (4:1), screening (3:1), and molecular biology (6:1).

CONCLUSIONS

The scope of the oncology curriculum has grown over the past decade. Nevertheless, further work is needed to improve medical student knowledge of cancers, particularly those relevant to public health needs. Defining minimum curricular content, emphasizing content based on population needs, and ensuring educational delivery with the support and expertise of oncologists and non-oncologists will be essential next steps.