Are we prepared for the future? A mixed-method study on quality management in decentralized family medicine teaching

'Hold the course(s)!' - a qualitative interview study of the impact of pandemic-triggered contact restrictions on online instruction in community-based family medicine teaching

The COVID-19 pandemic has been identified as a catalyst for the digitalization of medical education. Less is known about the specific impact of the pandemic on decentralized, community-based education, such as in General Practitioner practices. The aim of this study is to understand the impact of the digital transformation process, triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. As, family medicine courses involve both university-based and community-based teaching, this study focuses the mode and quality of instruction and instructors in family medicine teaching. A qualitative interview study was conducted. The participants (N = 12) of a multi-perspective Quality Circle in family medicine teaching were interviewed twice: first, in 2019, about digitalization in family medicine teaching in Tübingen, Germany, not yet aware of the global changes and local transformation that would take place shortly thereafter. Second, in a follow-up interview in 2020 about the transition process and digitalization following the impact of contact restrictions during the pandemic. Grounded Theory was used as a qualitative research approach to analyze the complex processes surrounding this transformation. By analyzing the interviews with various stakeholders of community and university-based teaching, a model for the digital transformation process of family medicine teaching at the University of Tübingen in response to an external stimulus (the pandemic) was developed. It involves six chronological steps: "The calm before the storm," "The storm hits," "All hands on deck," "Adrift," "Reset course," and "The silver lining." This model seeks to understand the process of digital transformation and its impact on the teaching institution (medical faculty of the University of Tübingen, Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Health Care) and instructors from an integrated perspective and thereby critically revisits prior concepts and opinions on the digitalization of medical teaching. Insights gained are presented as key messages.

Stakeholder Participation and Cross-Sectoral Cooperation in a Quality Circle on Community-Based Teaching: Results of a Qualitative Interview Study

Introduction

Community-based learning in family medicine practices is an increasingly important part of the medical curriculum internationally. It is widely regarded as one solution to healthcare system needs, such as training and retaining a workforce willing to work in primary care. However, the perspectives of community-based medical educators and representatives from university-based medical education are rarely integrated. To improve teaching quality and promote exchange between those two sectors of medical education, the Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Care at Tübingen University started a quality circle in family medicine teaching involving stakeholders from both sectors in 2018. The study aims to describe how the participants of this specific QC describe the cross-sectoral cooperation and participation of stakeholders in the quality management of community and university medical education.

Methods

After an observed meeting of the quality circle, semi-structured interviews were conducted with n=12 participants of the quality circle. Interview transcripts were analyzed using grounded theory.

Results

According to the participants, the quality circle provides a dynamic continuity which allows participants to navigate known barriers to transsectoral collaboration in the quality management of community-based medical education. The quality circle is perceived as an instrument for quality improvement that offered continuity and direction. At the same time, it allows for enough freedom and flexibility for the involved stakeholders to creatively work together on quality management and be inspired by their experiences.

Discussion

The quality circle has the potential to facilitate collaboration between the two teaching settings, form a creative community, and give medical students an active role in educational quality management.

A post-Flexner comparative case study of medical training responses to health system needs in Brazil and Germany

Health systems need medical professionals who can and will work in outpatient settings, such as general practitioner practices or health centres. However, medical students complete only a small portion of their medical training there. Furthermore, this type of training is sometimes seen as inferior to training in academic medical centres and university hospitals. Hence, the healthcare system’s demand and the execution of medical curricula do not match. Robust concepts for better alignment of both these parts are lacking. This study aims to (1) describe decentral learning environments in the context of traditional medical curricula and (2) derive ideas for implementing such scenarios further in existing curricula in response to particular medicosocietal needs.

This study is designed as qualitative cross-national comparative education research. It comprises three steps: first, two author teams consisting of course managers from Brazil and Germany write a report on change management efforts in their respective faculty. Both teams then compare and comment on the other’s report. Emerging similarities and discrepancies are categorised. Third, a cross-national analysis is conducted on the category system.

Stakeholders of medical education (medical students, teaching faculty, teachers in decentral learning environments) have differing standards, ideals and goals that are influenced by their own socialisation—prominently, Flexner’s view of university hospital training as optimal training. We reiterate that both central and decentral learning environments provide meaningful complementary learning opportunities. Medical students must be prepared to navigate social aspects of learning and accept responsibility for communities. They are uniquely positioned to serve as visionaries and university ambassadors to communities. As such, they can bridge the gap between university hospitals and decentral learning environments.