Introduction: Medical culture can make trainees feel like there is neither room for mistakes, nor space for personal shortcomings in the makeup of physicians. A dearth of role models who can exemplify that it is acceptable to need support compounds barriers to help-seeking once students struggle. We conducted a mixed-methods study to assess the impact of physicians sharing their living experiences with medical students. Methods: Second-year medical students participated, through synchronized videoconferencing, in an intervention consisting of 3 physicians who shared personal histories of vulnerability (e.g. failure on high-stakes exams; immigration and acculturation stress; and personal psychopathology, including treatment and recovery), followed by facilitated, small-group discussions. For the quantitative component, students completed the Opening Minds to Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC) before and after the intervention. For the qualitative component, we conducted focus groups to explore the study intervention. We analyzed anonymized transcripts using thematic analysis aided by NVivo software. Results: We invited all students in the class (n = 61, 46% women) to participate in the research component. Among the 53 participants (87% of the class), OMS-HC scores improved after the intervention ( P = .002), driven by the Attitudes ( P = .003) and Disclosure ( P < .001) subscales. We conducted 4 focus groups, each with a median of 6 participants (range, 5-7). We identified, through iterative thematic analysis of focus group transcripts, active components before, during, and after the intervention, with unexpected vulnerability and unarmored mutuality as particularly salient. Conclusions: Sharing histories of personal vulnerability by senior physicians can lessen stigmatized views of mental health and normalize help-seeking among medical students. Synchronous videoconferencing proved to be an effective delivery mechanism for the intervention in a ‘virtual wellness’ format. Candid sharing by physicians has the potential to enhance students’ ability to recognize, address, and seek help for their own mental health needs.
Objectives: Co-constructive patient simulation (CCPS) is a novel medical education approach that provides a participatory and emotionally supportive alternative to traditional supervision and training. CCPS can adapt iteratively and in real time to emergent vicissitudes and challenges faced by clinicians. We describe the first implementation of CCPS in psychiatry.Methods: We co-developed clinical scripts together with child and adolescent psychiatry senior fellows and professional actors with experience performing as simulated patients (SPs). We conducted the simulation sessions with interviewers blind to the content of case scenarios enacted by the SPs. Each hour-long simulation was followed by an hour-long debriefing session with all participants. We recorded and transcribed case preparation, simulation interactions, and debriefing sessions, and analyzed anonymized transcripts through qualitative analysis within a constructivist framework, aided by NVivo software.Results: Each of six CCPS sessions was attended by a median of 13 participants (range, 11–14). The first three sessions were conducted in person; the last three, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, via synchronized videoconferencing. Each of the sessions centered on clinically challenging and affectively charged situations informed by trainees' prior experiences. Through iterative thematic analysis we derived an alliterating “9R” model centered on three types of Reflection: (a) in action/“while doing” (Regulate, Relate, and Reason); (b) on action/“having done” (Realities, Restraints, and Relationships); and (c) for action/“will be doing” (with opportunities for Repair and Reaffirmation).Conclusions: CCPS is an experiential approach that fosters autonomous, meaningful, and individually tailored learning opportunities. CCPS and the 9R model for reflective practice can be effectively applied to psychiatry and have the potential to contribute uniquely to the educational needs of its trainees and practitioners.
Introduction: In simulation sessions using standardized patients (SPs), it is the instructors, rather than the learners, who traditionally identify learning goals. We describe co-constructive patient simulation (CCPS), an experiential method in which learners address self-identified goals. Methods: In CCPS, a designated learner creates a case script based on a challenging clinical encounter. The script is then shared with an actor who is experienced working as an SP in medical settings. An instructor with experience in the model is involved in creating, editing, and practicing role play of the case. After co-creation of the case, learners with no prior knowledge of the case (peers or a supervisor) interview the SP. The clinical encounter is followed by a group debriefing session. Results: We conducted 6 CCPS sessions with senior trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry. Topics that are difficult to openly talk about may be especially appropriate for the CCPS model-without overt guidance or solicitation, the scripts developed by learners for this series involved: medical errors and error disclosure; racial tensions, including overt racism; interprofessional conflict; transphobia; patient-on-provider violence; sexual health; and the sharing of vulnerability and personal imperfections in the clinical setting. Conclusions: Co-constructive patient simulation provides an alternative multistage and multimodal approach to traditional SP simulation sessions that can adapt iteratively and in real time to new clinical vicissitudes and challenges This learner-centered model holds promise to enrich simulation-based education by fostering autonomous, meaningful, and relevant experiences that are in alignment with trainees' self-identified learning goals.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
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.