BackgroundProfessional competence is important in delivering high quality patient care, and it can be enhanced by reflection and reflective discourse e.g. in mentoring groups. However, students are often reluctant though to engage in this discourse. A group mentoring program involving all preclinical students as well as faculty members and co-mentoring clinical students was initiated at Witten-Herdecke University. This study explores both the attitudes of those students towards such a program and factors that might hinder or enhance how students engage in reflective discourse.MethodsA qualitative design was applied using semi-structured focus group interviews with preclinical students and semi-structured individual interviews with mentors and co-mentors. The interview data were analyzed using thematic content analysis.ResultsStudents’ attitudes towards reflective discourse on professional challenges were diverse. Some students valued the new program and named positive outcomes regarding several features of professional development. Enriching experiences were described. Others expressed aversive attitudes. Three reasons for these were given: unclear goals and benefits, interpersonal problems within the groups hindering development and intrapersonal issues such as insecurity and traditional views of medical education. Participants mentioned several program setup factors that could enhance how students engage in such groups: explaining the program thoroughly, setting expectations and integrating the reflective discourse in a meaningful way into the curriculum, obliging participation without coercion, developing a sense of security, trust and interest in each other within the groups, randomizing group composition and facilitating group moderators as positive peer and faculty role models and as learning group members.ConclusionsA well-designed and empathetic setup of group mentoring programs can help raise openness towards engaging in meaningful reflective discourse. Reflection on and communication of professional challenges can, in turn, improve professional development, which is essential for high quality patient care.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-017-0951-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background: Attitudes of medical students form the basis for medical actions. Because of the specific characteristics of psychiatric patients, positive attitudes of medical students towards psychiatry should be a higher goal in medical education. Aim: We hypothesize that medical students in different educational programs develop different attitudes towards psychiatry. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, students enrolled in different educational programs completed the 'attitudes towards psychiatry' questionnaire (ATP-30). Data concerning experiences in psychiatry, personality traits and socio-demographic variables including gender were also analyzed. Results: The response rate of students in the PBL-curriculum (n ¼ 61) was >90%, in the traditional curriculum (n ¼ 280) >75%. Attitudes towards psychiatry of male students in the Problem-Based Learning program were equal to the female students' attitudes in both programs. Female students' attitudes in the traditional curriculum reached comparably good results while male students' displayed the worst attitudes.The personality factors 'openness to experience' and 'agreeableness' correlated significantly with positive attitudes towards psychiatry. PBL-students showed significantly more 'openness to experience'. Conclusion: Educational programs might play a role for the development of attitudes towards psychiatry, especially in male students. Factors influencing enrollment into special educational programs should also have been taken into account. An independent study with a larger number of participants will be required to support these findings.
ObjectiveCare for severely injured patients requires multidisciplinary teamwork. A decrease in the number of accident victims ultimately affects the routine and skills. PHTLS (“Pre-Hospital Trauma Life Support”) courses are established two-day courses for medical and non-medical rescue service personnel, aimed at improving the pre-hospital care of trauma patients worldwide. The study aims the examination of the quality of documentation before and after PHTLS courses as a surrogate endpoint of training effectiveness and awareness.MethodsThis was a prospective pre-post intervention trial and was part of the mixed-method longitudinal EPPTC (Effect of Paramedic Training on Pre-Hospital Trauma Care) study, evaluating subjective and objective changes among participants and real patient care, as a result of PHTLS courses. The courses provide an overview of the SAMPLE approach for interrogation of anamnestic information, which is believed to be responsible for patient safety as relevant, among others, “Allergies,” “Medication,” and “Patient History” (AMP). The focus of the course is not the documentation.ResultsIn total, 320 protocols were analyzed before and after the training. The PHTLS course led to a significant increase (p < 0.001) in the “AMP” information in the documentation. The subgroups analysis of “allergies” (+47.2%), “drugs” (+38.1%), and “medical history” (+27.8%) before and after the PHTLS course showed a significant increase in the information content.ConclusionIn summary, we showed that PHTLS training improves documentation quality, which we used as a surrogate endpoint for learning effectiveness and awareness. In this regard, we demonstrated that participants use certain parts of training in real life, thereby suggesting that the learning methods of PHTLS training are effective. These results, however, do not indicate whether patient care has changed.
BackgroundAccidents are the leading cause of death in adults prior to middle age. The care of severely injured patients is an interdisciplinary challenge. Limited evidence is available concerning pre-hospital trauma care training programs and the advantage of such programs for trauma patients. The effect on trauma care procedures or on the safety of emergency crews on the scene is limited; however, there is a high level of experience and expert opinion.MethodsI – Video-recorded case studies are the basis of an assessment tool and checklist being developed to verify the results of programs to train participants in the care of seriously injured patients, also known as “objective structured clinical examination” (OSCE). The timing, completeness and quality of the individual measures are assessed using appropriate scales. The evaluation of team communication and interaction will be analyzed with qualitative methods and quantified and verified by existing instruments (e.g. the Clinical Team Scale). The developed assessment tool is validated by several experts in the fields of trauma care, trauma research and medical education. II a) In a German emergency medical service, the subjective assessment of paramedics of their pre-hospital care of trauma patients is evaluated at three time points, namely before, immediately after and one year after training. b) The effect of a standardized course concept on the quality of documentation in actual field operations is determined based on three items relevant to patient safety before and after the course. c) The assessment tool will be used to assess the effect of a standardized course concept on procedures and team communication in pre-hospital trauma care using scenario-based case studies.DiscussionThis study explores the effect of training on paramedics. After successful study completion, further multicenter studies are conceivable, which would evaluate emergency-physician staffed teams. The influence on the patients and prehospital measures should be assessed based on a retrospective analysis of the emergency room data.Trials registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register, ID DRKS00004713.
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.