Evaluation of a paediatric asthma education package for health professionals

Preclinical curriculum of prospective case-based teaching with faculty- and student-blinded approach

BACKGROUND

Case-based teaching with real patient cases provides benefit of simulating real-world cognition. However, while clinical practice involves a prospective approach to cases, preclinical instruction typically involves full disclosure of case content to faculty, introducing hindsight bias into faculty teaching in medical curricula.

METHODS

During 2015-2018, we piloted an optional medical school curriculum involving 6-7 one-hour sessions over a 3-month period each year. New groups enrolled each year from first- and second-year classes. A facilitator provided a blinded physician discussant and blinded students with case information during and not in advance of each session, allowing prospective case-based discussions. Cases were based on real patients treated in the Department of Medicine. Clinical material was presented in the chronologic sequence encountered by treating physicians. Content covered a median of 5 patient visits/case (range: 2-10) spanning over months. A 14-item survey addressing components of the reporter-interpreter-manager-educator (RIME) scheme was developed and used to compare self-reported clinical skills between course participants and non-participant controls during the 2016 course iteration.

RESULTS

This elective curriculum at Stanford School of Medicine involved 170 preclinical students (22.7% of 750 eligible). During the 2016 course iteration, a quasi-experimental study compared self-reported clinical skills between 29 course participants (response rate: 29/49 [59.2%]) and 35 non-participant controls (response rate: 35/132 [26.5%]); students self-assessed clinical skills via the RIME-based survey developed for the course. Two-sample t-tests compared the change in pre- and post-course skills between course participants and non-participants. Of 15 Department of Medicine faculty members invited as discussants, 12 (80%) consented to participate. Compared with controls, first-year participants self-assessed significantly greater improvement in understanding how clinicians reason through cases step-by-step to arrive at diagnoses (P = 0.049), work through cases in longitudinal settings (P = 0.049), and share information with patients (P = 0.047). Compared with controls, second-year participants self-assessed significantly greater improvement (P = 0.040) in understanding how clinicians reason through cases step-by-step to arrive at diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective case-based discussions with blinding of faculty and students to clinical content circumvents hindsight bias and may impart real-world cognitive skills as determined by student self-report.

Development and pilot testing of an online case-based approach to shared decision making skills training for clinicians

Background

Although research suggests that patients prefer a shared decision making (SDM) experience when making healthcare decisions, clinicians do not routinely implement SDM into their practice and training programs are needed. Using a novel case-based strategy, we developed and pilot tested an online educational program to promote shared decision making (SDM) by primary care clinicians.

Methods

A three-phased approach was used: 1) development of a conceptual model of the SDM process; 2) development of an online teaching case utilizing the Design A Case (DAC) authoring template, a well-tested process used to create peer-reviewed web-based clinical cases across all levels of healthcare training; and 3) pilot testing of the case. Participants were clinician members affiliated with several primary care research networks across the United States who answered an invitation email. The case used prostate cancer screening as the clinical context and was delivered online. Post-intervention ratings of clinicians’ general knowledge of SDM, knowledge of specific SDM steps, confidence in and intention to perform SDM steps were also collected online.

Results

Seventy-nine clinicians initially volunteered to participate in the study, of which 49 completed the case and provided evaluations. Forty-three clinicians (87.8%) reported the case met all the learning objectives, and 47 (95.9%) indicated the case was relevant for other equipoise decisions. Thirty-one clinicians (63.3%) accessed supplementary information via links provided in the case. After viewing the case, knowledge of SDM was high (over 90% correctly identified the steps in a SDM process). Determining a patient’s preferred role in making the decision (62.5% very confident) and exploring a patient’s values (65.3% very confident) about the decisions were areas where clinician confidence was lowest. More than 70% of the clinicians intended to perform SDM in the future.

Conclusions

A comprehensive model of the SDM process was used to design a case-based approach to teaching SDM skills to primary care clinicians. The case was favorably rated in this pilot study. Clinician skills training for helping patients clarify their values and for assessing patients’ desire for involvement in decision making remain significant challenges and should be a focus of future comparative studies.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1472-6947-14-95) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

PACE: Pharmacists use the power of communication in paediatric asthma

BACKGROUND

Paediatric asthma is a public health burden in Australia despite the availability of national asthma guidelines. Community pharmacy interventions focusing on paediatric asthma are scarce. Practitioner Asthma Communication and Education (PACE) is an evidence-based program, developed in the USA for general practice physicians, aimed at addressing the issues of poor clinician-patient communication in the management of paediatric asthma. This program has been shown to improve paediatric asthma management practices of general practitioners in the USA and Australia. The development of a PACE program for community pharmacists will fill a void in the current armamentarium for pharmacist-patient care.

OBJECTIVES

To adapt the educational program, PACE, to the community pharmacy setting. To test the feasibility of the new program for pharmacy and to explore its potential impact on pharmacists' communication skills and asthma related practices.

SETTING

Community pharmacies located within the Sydney metropolitan.

METHOD

The PACE framework was reviewed by the research team and amended in order to ensure its relevance within the pharmacy context, thereby developing PACE for Pharmacy. Forty-four pharmacists were recruited and trained in small groups in the PACE for Pharmacy workshops. Pharmacists' satisfaction and acceptability of the workshops, confidence in using communication strategies pre- and post-workshop and self-reported behaviour change post workshop were evaluated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Pharmacist self-reported changes in communication and teaching behaviours during a paediatric asthma consultation.

RESULTS

All 44 pharmacists attended both workshops, completed pre- and post-workshop questionnaires and provided feedback on the workshops (100 % retention). The participants reported a high level of satisfaction and valued the interactive nature of the workshops. Following the PACE for Pharmacy program, pharmacists reported significantly higher levels in using the communication strategies, confidence in their application and their helpfulness. Pharmacists checked for written asthma self-management plan possession and inhaler device technique more regularly, and provided verbal instructions more frequently to paediatric asthma patients/carers at the initiation of a new medication.

CONCLUSION

This study provides preliminary evidence that the PACE program can be translated into community pharmacy. PACE for Pharmacy positively affected self-reported communication and education behaviours of pharmacists. The high response rate shows that pharmacists are eager to expand on their clinical role in primary healthcare.

The effectiveness of case-based learning in health professional education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 23

BACKGROUND

Case-based learning (CBL) is a long established pedagogical method, which is defined in a number of ways depending on the discipline and type of 'case' employed. In health professional education, learning activities are commonly based on patient cases. Basic, social and clinical sciences are studied in relation to the case, are integrated with clinical presentations and conditions (including health and ill-health) and student learning is, therefore, associated with real-life situations. Although many claims are made for CBL as an effective learning and teaching method, very little evidence is quoted or generated to support these claims. We frame this review from the perspective of CBL as a type of inquiry-based learning.

AIM

To explore, analyse and synthesise the evidence relating to the effectiveness of CBL as a means of achieving defined learning outcomes in health professional prequalification training programmes.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We focused the review on CBL for prequalification health professional programmes including medicine, dentistry, veterinary science, nursing and midwifery, social care and the allied health professions (physiotherapy, occupational therapy, etc.). Papers were required to have outcome data on effectiveness.

SEARCH STRATEGIES

The search covered the period from 1965 to week 4 September 2010 and the following databases: ASSIA, CINAHL, EMBASE, Education Research, Medline and Web of Knowledge (WoK). Two members of the topic review group (TRG) independently reviewed the 173 abstracts retrieved from Medline and compared findings. As there was good agreement on inclusion, one went onto review the WoK and ASSIA EndNote databases and the other the Embase, CINAHL and Education Research databases to decide on papers to submit for coding. Coding and data analysis: The TRG modified the standard best evidence medical education coding sheet to fit our research questions and assessed each paper for quality. After a preliminary reliability exercise, each full paper was read and graded by one reviewer with the papers scoring 3-5 (of 5) for strength of findings being read by a second reviewer. A summary of each completed coding form was entered into an Excel spread sheet. The type of data in the papers was not amenable to traditional meta-analysis because of the variability in interventions, information given, student numbers (and lack of) and timings. We, therefore, adopted a narrative synthesis method to compare, contrast, synthesise and interpret the data, working within a framework of inquiry-based learning.

RESULTS

The final number of coded papers for inclusion was 104. The TRG agreed that 23 papers would be classified as of higher quality and significance (22%). There was a wide diversity in the type, timing, number and length of exposure to cases and how cases were defined. Medicine was the most commonly included profession. Numbers of students taking part in CBL varied from below 50 to over 1000. The shortest interventions were two hours, and one case, whereas the longest was CBL through a whole year. Group sizes ranged from students working alone to over 30, with the majority between 2 and 15 students per group. The majority of studies involved single cohorts of students (61%), with 29% comparing multiple groups, 8% involving different year groups and 2% with historical controls. The outcomes evaluation was either carried out postintervention only (78 papers; 75%), preintervention and postintervention (23 papers; 22%) or during and postintervention (3 papers; <3%). Our analysis provided the basis for discussion of definitions of CBL, methods used and advocated, topics and learning outcomes and whether CBL is effective based on the evaluation data.

CONCLUSION

Overwhelmingly, students enjoy CBL and think that it enhances their learning. The empirical data taken as a whole are inconclusive as to the effects on learning compared with other types of activity. Teachers enjoy CBL, partly because it engages, and is perceived to motivate, students. CBL seems to foster learning in small groups though whether this is the case delivery or the group learning effect is unclear.