BackgroundThere are currently 15 million Americans who provide over 80% of the care required by their family members with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias. Yet care for caregivers continues to be fragmented and few evidence-based interventions have been translated into routine clinical care and therefore remain inaccessible to most family caregivers. To address this gap, the Caring for the Caregiver program is being developed at UT Health San Antonio, School of Nursing to improve support services and health outcomes for family caregivers. Our purpose is to describe the engagement process undertaken to assess caregiver and community needs and how findings are informing program development.MethodsWe are using a model of public engagement that consists of communication of information, collection of information from stakeholders, and collaboration where stakeholders are partners in an exchange of information to guide program activities. An assessment of the community was undertaken to identify resources/services for family caregivers. Subsequently, stakeholders were invited to a community-academic forum to discuss strategies to build on existing strengths for family caregiving and to identify gaps in care. Detailed notes were taken and all discussions were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis.ResultsWe conducted site visits with 15 community agencies, interviewed 13 family caregivers, and attended community events including support groups and health and senior fairs. Fifty-three diverse stakeholders attended the community-academic forum. Participants identified existing assets within our community to support family caregivers. Consistent among groups was the need to increase awareness in our community about family caregivers. Themes identified from the discussion were: making the invisible visible, you don’t know what you don’t know, learning too late, and anticipating and preparing for the future.ConclusionsIncorporating caregiver and community stakeholders was critical to ensure that the priorities of our community are addressed in a culturally responsive accessible program for family caregivers. The forum served as important mechanism to partner with the community and will be an annual event where we can continue to work with our stakeholders around needs for practice, education, and research.

Background Interprofessional communication is fundamental to the delivery of healthcare and can be taught in medical school and other health professional schools through interprofessional education (IPE) activities. Simulation centers have become a predominant location for simulation IPE activities with infrastructure able to support high fidelity activities in a controlled environment. In this secondary analysis of a scoping review conducted on simulation-based IPE, we describe the characteristics of previously reported simulation IPE activities involving undergraduate medical students in a simulation center focused on interprofessional communication. Methods Electronic searches of PubMed, CINAHL, and ERIC databases in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines were conducted to isolate relevant articles from 2016–2020. In total, 165 peer-reviewed articles met inclusion criteria and data extraction linked to four research questions was applied by one individual and the accuracy was confirmed by a second individual. A secondary analysis was performed to describe what existing approaches for simulation IPE in simulation center settings have been used to explicitly achieve interprofessional communication competencies in undergraduate medical education. A sub-dataset was developed from the original scoping review and identified 21 studies describing simulation IPE activities that took place in dedicated simulation centers, targeted the IPEC interprofessional communication domain, and involved undergraduate medical students. Results Though diverse, the majority of simulation IPE activities described high-fidelity approaches involving standardized patients and utilized assessment tools with established validity evidence in IPE activities to measure learning outcomes. A minority of simulation IPE activities were described as hybrid and utilized more than one resource or equipment for the activity and only two were longitudinal in nature. Learning outcomes were focused predominantly on modification of attitudes/perceptions and few targeted higher levels of assessment. Conclusions Educators charged with developing simulation IPE activities for medical students focused on interprofessional communication should incorporate assessment tools that have validity evidence from similar activities, target higher level learning outcomes, and leverage hybrid models to develop longitudinal simulation IPE activities. Though an ideal environment to achieve higher level learning outcomes, simulation centers are not required for meaningful simulation IPE activities.

No abstract

No abstract