WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Pulse oximetry screening at 24 hours of age improves detection of critical congenital heart disease in asymptomatic newborns. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:This study describes an initial experience with pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart disease and provides a strategy for preparing for state implementation of recent federal newborn screening recommendations. abstract OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of preparedness and resources needed in Minnesota for the implementation of newborn screening for critical congenital heart diseases (CCHDs). METHODS:A cross sectional survey of all birth centers in Minnesota was performed to assess the capacity to deliver care essential for the CCHD screening program. Compliance with the screening algorithm, nursing workload, and cost were assessed by using a pilot program implemented in 6 normal newborn nurseries.RESULTS: Ninety-one of 99 eligible centers participated in the survey and 90 reported the ability to screen newborns in accordance with recommendations. Only 22 centers, with 63% of births, had access to echocardiography and routinely stocked prostaglandins for neonatal use. Our pilot study screened 7549 newborns with 6 failed screens and 1 CCHD diagnosis. Two of the failed screens were due to misinterpretation of the algorithm, 1 failed screen was not reported, and 4 failed screens were not recognized. Repeated screens were required for 115 newborns, with 29% of retesting due to misinterpretation of the algorithm. The mean nursing time required was 5.5 minutes, and the cost was $5.10 per screen. CONCLUSIONS:In Minnesota, two-thirds of newborns are born in centers with resources for initial diagnosis and management of CCHD. Implementation of a pilot screening program demonstrated minimal increase in nursing workload, but identified problems with interpretation of the algorithm and data reporting. This pilot project suggests the need for simplification of the algorithm, additional training of health care providers, and development of a centralized reporting mechanism. Pediatrics 2013;132:e587-e594
Game-based learning (GBL) in medical education is emerging as a valid alternative to traditional teaching methods. Well-designed GBL sessions use non-threatening competition to capitalize on heightened learner arousal, allowing for high-level engagement and dynamic group discussion. While many templates for specific educational games have been published, little has been written on strategies for educators to create their own or how to use them with maximal effectiveness. These 12 tips provide specific recommendations for the successful design and implementation of GBL sessions in medical education based on a review of the literature and insight from experienced designers.
Background Uncertainty is ubiquitous in medical practice. The Pediatrics Milestones from the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education state that advanced learners should acknowledge and communicate about clinical uncertainty. If uncertainty is not acknowledged, patient care may suffer. There are no described curricula specifically aimed to improve learners’ ability to acknowledge and discuss clinical uncertainty. We describe an educational intervention designed to fill this gap. Methods Second-year pediatric residents engaged in a two-phase simulation-based educational intervention designed to improve their ability to communicate about diagnostic uncertainty with patients and caregivers. In each phase, residents engaged in two simulated cases and debriefs. Performance was assessed after each simulated patient encounter using standardized metrics, along with learner perceptions of the experience. Results Residents’ skills in communicating with patients and families about diagnostic uncertainty improved after this intervention (mean score post 3.84 vs. 3.28 pre on a five-point Likert scale, p<0.001). Residents rated the experience as relevant, challenging and positive. Conclusions This prospective study suggests that a simulation-based intervention was effective in improving resident physicians’ skills in communicating about diagnostic uncertainty with patients and families. Further study is needed to determine how learners perform in real clinical environments.
Purpose To explore validity evidence for the use of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) as an assessment framework in medical education. Method Formative assessments on the 13 Core EPAs for entering residency were collected for 4 cohorts of students over a 9- to 12-month longitudinal integrated clerkship as part of the Education in Pediatrics Across the Continuum pilot at the University of Minnesota Medical School. The students requested assessments from clinical supervisors based on direct observation while engaging in patient care together. Based on each observation, the faculty member rated the student on a 9-point scale corresponding to levels of supervision required. Six EPAs were included in the present analyses. Student ratings were depicted as curves describing their performance over time; regression models were employed to fit the curves. The unit of analyses for the learning curves was observations rather than individual students. Results (1) Frequent assessments on EPAs provided a developmental picture of competence consistent with the negative exponential learning curve theory; (2) This finding was true across a variety of EPAs and across students; and (3) The time to attain the threshold level of performance on the EPA for entrustment varied by student and EPA. Conclusions The results provide validity evidence for an EPA-based program of assessment. Students assessed using multiple observations performing the Core EPAs for entering residency demonstrate classic developmental progression toward the desired level of competence resulting in entrustment decisions. Future work with larger data samples will allow further psychometric analyses of assessment of EPAs.
Medical educators can use the professionalism checklists developed in this study to aid in the early identification and subsequent remediation of unprofessional behavior in medical students and residents.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.