Consensus of the Millennium Conference on Teaching High Value Care

A multisite randomized trial of implicit versus explicit modeling in clinical teaching

PURPOSE

Faculty modeling of desired behaviors has historically been a part of the apprenticeship model of clinical teaching, yet little is known about best practices for modeling. This study compared the educational impact of implicitly versus explicitly modeled communication skills among U.S. medical students.

METHOD

Fourth-year medical students from six U.S. academic medical centers were randomly assigned one simulated clinical encounter in which faculty provided either implicit or explicit modeling of important communication skills. Outcomes were assessed by electronic surveys immediately before and after the simulations. Students were blinded to the purpose of the study.

RESULTS

Students in the explicit arm were more likely to correctly cite two of the three key specific communication elements modeled by faculty: deliberate body position (53.3% vs. 18.6%, p < 0.001) and summarizing patient understanding (62.2% vs. 11.6%, p < 0.001). More students in the explicit study arm reported faculty 'demonstrated a key behavior that they wanted me to be able to perform in the future' (93.2% versus 62.8%, p = 0.002). Participating faculty stated they would modify their teaching approach in response to their experiences in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

In a multi-center randomized trial, explicit faculty role-modeling led to greater uptake of communication knowledge, greater recognition of skills, and a greater sense that faculty expected these skills to be adopted by students. These results must be considered in the context, however, of a simulated environment and a short timeframe for assessing learning with students who volunteered for a simulated experience.

Self-Directed Learning in Medical Education: Training for a Lifetime of Discovery

Issue: Life-long learning is a skill that is central to competent health professionals, and medical educators have sought to understand how adult professionals learn, adapt to new information, and independently seek to learn more. Accrediting bodies now mandate that training programs teach in ways that promote self-directed learning (SDL) but do not provide adequate guidance on how to address this requirement. Evidence: The model for the SDL mandate in physician training is based mostly on early childhood and secondary education evidence and literature, and may not capture the unique environment of medical training and clinical education. Furthermore, there is uncertainty about how medical schools and postgraduate training programs should implement and evaluate SDL educational interventions. The Shapiro Institute for Education and Research, in conjunction with the Association of American Medical Colleges, convened teams from eight medical schools from North America to address the challenge of defining, implementing, and evaluating SDL and the structures needed to nurture and support its development in health professional training. Implications: In this commentary, the authors describe SDL in Medical Education, (SDL-ME), which is a construct of learning and pedagogy specific to medical students and physicians in training. SDL-ME builds on the foundations of SDL and self-regulated learning theory, but is specifically contextualized for the unique responsibilities of physicians to patients, inter-professional teams, and society. Through consensus, the authors offer suggestions for training programs to teach and evaluate SDL-ME. To teach self-directed learning requires placing the construct in the context of patient care and of an obligation to society at large. The SDL-ME construct builds upon SDL and SRL frameworks and suggests SDL as foundational to health professional identity formation.KEYWORDSself-directed learning; graduate medical education; undergraduate medical education; theoretical frameworksSupplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2021.1938074 .

Optimizing allocation of curricular content across the Undergraduate & Graduate Medical Education Continuum

BACKGROUND

Medical educators struggle to incorporate socio-cultural topics into crowded curricula. The "continuum of learning" includes undergraduate and graduate medical education. Utilizing an exemplar socio-cultural topic, we studied the feasibility of achieving expert consensus among two groups of faculty (experts in medical education and experts in social determinants of health) on which aspects of the topic could be taught during undergraduate versus graduate medical education.

METHODS

A modified Delphi method was used to generate expert consensus on which learning objectives of social determinants of health are best taught at each stage of medical education. Delphi respondents included experts in medical education or social determinants of health. A survey was created using nationally published criteria for social determinants of health learning objectives. Respondents were asked 1) which learning objectives were necessary for every physician (irrespective of specialty) to develop competence upon completion of medical training and 2) when the learning objective should be taught. Respondents were also asked an open-ended question on how they made the determination of when in the medical education continuum the learning objective should be taught.

RESULTS

26 out of 55 experts (13 social determinants of health and 13 education experts) responded to all 3 Delphi rounds. Experts evaluated a total of 49 learning objectives and were able to achieve consensus for at least one of the two research questions for 45 of 49 (92%) learning objectives. 50% more learning objectives reached consensus for inclusion in undergraduate (n = 21) versus graduate medical education (n = 14).

CONCLUSIONS

A modified Delphi technique demonstrated that experts could identify key learning objectives of social determinants of health needed by all physicians and allocate content along the undergraduate and graduate medical education continuum. This approach could serve as a model for similar socio-cultural content. Future work should employ a qualitative approach to capture principles utilized by experts when making these decisions.

Discrete choice experiment on educating value-based healthcare

INTRODUCTION

Identifying costs and values in healthcare interventions as well as the ability to measure and consider costs relative to value for patients are pivotal in clinical decision-making and medical education. This study explores residents' preferences in educating value-based healthcare (VBHC) during postgraduate medical education. Exploring residents' preferences in VBHC education, in order to understand what shapes their choices, might contribute to improved medical residency education and healthcare as a whole.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) examined which conditions for educating VBHC are preferred by residents. DCE gives more insight into the trade-off's residents make when choosing alternatives, and which conditions for educating VBHC have the most influence on residents' preference.

RESULTS

This DCE shows that residents prefer knowledge on both medical practice as well as the process of care-to be educated by an expert on VBHC together with a clinician. They prefer limited protected time to conduct VBHC initiatives (thus while at work) and desire the inclusion of VBHC in formal educational plans.

CONCLUSION

When optimising graduate and postgraduate medical education curricula, these preferences should be considered to create necessary conditions for the facilitation and participation of residents in VBHC education and the set-up of VBHC initiatives.

Incorporating content related to value and cost-considerations in clinical decision-making: enhancements to medical education

Although incorporating cost-considerations during healthcare decision-making is increasingly important to American patients and physicians, content related to these constructs is not routinely included in medical education. As a result, physicians are ill-equipped to consider costs. This study sought input from practicing physicians on perceived deficiencies in current teaching and recommendations for necessary content to include in medical teaching. We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews utilizing a purposeful maximum variation sample of cardiologists and neonatologists practicing in diverse settings. We analyzed interviews using conventional content analysis. 18 cardiologists and 17 neonatologists participated in this study. Respondents perceived that current teaching does not impart sufficient knowledge of value and cost considerations to achieve patient-centered, high-value decision-making. They identified the following priority areas for education related to healthcare costs: the business of medicine and information about out-of-pocket patient costs, training in health research interpretation skills to critically appraise evidence, and communication skills to engage patients as partners in shared decision-making. Participants recommended a variety of teaching methods, including didactic sessions on core topics, role modeling and case studies. American physicians perceive learning needs related to the incorporation of costs into clinical decision-making that can inform curriculum development initiatives in this field. Physicians perceive knowledge of these topics and skills to be crucial to achieving patient-centered high-value care. Concomitant health system reforms supporting the needs of the patient at its center are essential to enable physicians to focus on a patient-centered approach to healthcare delivery.

Seeking a stable foundation to build on: 1st-Year residents' views of high-value care teaching

BACKGROUND

United States (US) residency programs have been recently mandated to teach the concept of high-value care (HVC) defined as care that balances the benefits of interventions with their harms and costs. We know that reflective practice is a key to successful learning of HVC; however, little is known about resident perceptions of HVC learning. To better inform HVC teaching in graduate medical education, we asked 1^st-year residents to reflect on their HVC learning.

METHODS

We conducted three focus groups (n = 36) and online forum discussion (n = 13) of 1^st-year internal medicine residents. A constructivist grounded theory approach was used to assess transcripts for recurrent themes to identify the perspectives of residents shared about HVC learning.

RESULTS

Residents perceived their learning of HVC as limited by cultural and systemic barriers that included limited time, fear of missing a diagnosis, perceived expectations of attending physicians, and poor cost transparency. While the residents reported considerable exposure to the construct of HVC, they desired a more consistent framework that could be applied in different situations. In particular, residents reported frustration with variable incentives, objectives, and definitions pertaining to HVC. Suggestions for improvement in HVC teaching outlined three main needs for: (1) a generalizable framework to systematically approach each case that could be later adapted to independent practice; (2) objective real-time data on costs, benefits, and harms of medical interventions; and (3) standardized approach to assess resident competency in HVC.

DISCUSSION

As frontline clinicians and the intended target audience for HVC education, 1^st-year residents are in a unique position to provide feedback to improve HVC teaching in residency. Our findings highlight the learners' desire for a more systematic approach to HVC teaching that includes the development of a stable generalizable framework for decision-making, objective data, and standardized assessment. These findings contrast current educational interventions in HVC that aim at reducing the overuse of specific practices.

Relationship Between Institutional Investment in High-Value Care (HVC) Performance Improvement and Internal Medicine Residents' Perceptions of HVC Training

PURPOSE

To measure the association between institutional investment in high-value care (HVC) performance improvement and resident HVC experiences.

METHOD

The authors analyzed data from two 2014 surveys assessing institutions' investments in HVC performance improvement as reported by program directors (PDs) and residents' perceptions of the frequency of HVC teaching, participation in HVC-focused quality improvement (QI), and views on HVC topics. The authors measured the association between institutional investment and resident-reported experiences using logistic regression, controlling for program and resident characteristics.

RESULTS

The sample included 214 programs and 9,854 residents (59.3% of 361 programs, 55.2% of 17,851 residents surveyed). Most PDs (158/209; 75.6%) reported some support. Residents were more likely to report HVC discussions with faculty at least a few times weekly if they trained in programs that offered HVC-focused faculty development (odds ratio [OR] = 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.37; P = .01), that supported such faculty development (OR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.04-1.41; P = .02), or that provided physician cost-of-care performance data (OR = 1.19; 95% CI 1.03-1.39; P = .02). Residents were more likely to report participation in HVC QI if they trained in programs with a formal HVC curriculum (OR = 1.83; 95% CI 1.48-2.27; P < .001) or with HVC-focused faculty development (OR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.15-1.85; P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Institutional investment in HVC-related faculty development and physician feedback on costs of care may increase the frequency of HVC teaching and resident participation in HVC-related QI.

Physician Experiences With High Value Care in Internal Medicine Residency: Mixed-Methods Study of 2003-2013 Residency Graduates

Phenomenon: High healthcare costs and relatively poor health outcomes in the United States have led to calls to improve the teaching of high value care (defined as care that balances potential benefits of interventions with their harms including costs) to physicians-in-training. Numerous interventions to increase high value care in graduate medical education were implemented at the national and local levels over the past decade. However, there has been little evaluation of their impact on physician experiences during training and perceived preparedness for practice. We aimed to assess trends in U.S. physician experiences with high value care during residency over the past decade.

APPROACH

This mixed-methods study used a cross-sectional survey mailed July 2014 to January 2015 to 902 internists who completed residency in 2003-2013, randomly selected from the American Medical Association Masterfile. Quantitative analyses of survey responses and content analysis of free-text comments submitted by respondents were performed.

FINDINGS

A total of 456 physicians (50.6%) responded. Fewer than one fourth reported being exposed to teaching about high value care at least frequently (23.6%, 106/450). Only 43.8% of respondents (193/446) felt prepared to use overtreatment guidelines in conversations with patients, whereas 85.8% (379/447) felt prepared to participate in shared decision making with patients at the conclusion of their training, and 84.4% (380/450) reported practicing generic prescribing. Physicians who completed residency more recently were more likely to report practicing generic prescribing and feeling well prepared to use overtreatment guidelines in conversations with patients (p < .01 for both). Insights: In a national survey, recent U.S. internal medicine residency graduates were more likely to experience high value care during training, which may reflect increased national and local efforts in this area. However, being exposed to high value care as a trainee may not translate into specific tools for practice. In fact, many U.S. internists reported inadequate exposure to prepare them for patient discussions about costs and the use of overtreatment guidelines in practice.

Teaching medical students about cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Rising and burdensome health care costs have driven interest in the practice of high-value care (HVC) and have inspired calls for increased HVC training across all levels of medical education, including among undergraduate medical students.

CONTEXT

Classroom-based HVC curricula targeted to medical students have not been previously described in the medical literature.

INNOVATION

We developed and evaluated a workshop comprising a lecture, a small-group exercise and a group discussion to instruct medical students on interpreting cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA), applying CEA to patient care and discussing the cost of care with patients. From January 2014 to September 2015 the workshop was administered to five cohorts, 120 students in total, in the internal medicine clerkships at two US medical schools. Pre- and post-intervention confidence in various domains was assessed with a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 to 4. The overall response rate was 87.9 per cent. The proportion of students reporting high confidence scores (3 or 4) rose significantly (p < 0.01) in each domain: from 16.2 to 76.9 per cent for calculating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER); from 16.0 to 79.6 per cent for interpreting quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); from 8.7 to 71.3 per cent for using CEA in patient management; and from 15.3 to 71.4 per cent for discussing costs with patients. Students rated the overall quality of the course as 3.82 out of 5. Rising and burdensome health care costs have driven interest in the practice of high-value care IMPLICATIONS: Our experience of developing, evaluating and refining an HVC course targeted at medical students taught us that such a course is needed, can be educational and can be well-received. Future research is needed to assess the effects of curricula on clinical practice.