Patients scored students' performance high compared with students' self-assessments. Teachers' scores were in accordance with patients' scores. Teachers' written evaluations of students were often general. There is a potential for improving teachers' feedback in terms of more specific and concrete comments.

High quality care relies on interprofessional teamwork. We developed a short simulation-based course for final year medical, nursing and nursing anaesthesia students, using scenarios from emergency medicine. The aim of this paper is to describe the adaptation of an interprofessional simulation course in an undergraduate setting and to report participants' experiences with the course and students' learning outcomes. We evaluated the course collecting responses from students through questionnaires with both closed-ended and open-ended questions, supplemented by the facilitators' assessment of students' performance. Our data is based on responses from 310 students and 16 facilitators who contributed through three evaluation phases. In the analysis, we found that students reported emotional activation and learning outcomes within the domains self-insight and stress management, understanding of the leadership role, insight into teamwork, and skills in team communication. In subsequent questionnaire studies students reported having gained insights about communication, teamwork and leadership, and they believed they would be better leaders of teams and/or team members after having completed the course. Facilitators' observations suggested a progress in students' non-technical skills during the course. The facilitators observed that nursing anaesthesia students seemed to be more comfortable in finding their role in the team than the two other groups. In conclusion, we found that an interprofessional simulation-based emergency team training course with a focus on leadership, communication and teamwork, was feasible to run on a regular basis for large groups of students. The course improved the students' team skills and received a favourable evaluation from both students and faculty.

ObjectiveFeedback may be scarce and unsystematic during students' clerkship periods. We wanted to explore general practitioners' (GPs) and medical students' experiences with giving and receiving supervision and feedback during a clerkship in general practice, with a focus on their experiences with using a structured tool (StudentPEP) to facilitate feedback and supervision.DesignQualitative study.SettingTeachers and students from a six-week clerkship in general practice for fifth year medical students were interviewed in two student and two teacher focus groups.Subjects21 GPs and nine medical students.ResultsWe found that GPs first supported students' development in the familiarization phase by exploring the students' expectations and competency level. When mutual trust had been established through the familiarization phase GPs encouraged students to conduct their own consultations while being available for supervision and feedback. Both students and GPs emphasized that good feedback promoting students' professional development was timely, constructive, supportive, and focused on ways to improve. Among the challenges GPs mentioned were giving feedback on behavioral issues such as body language and insensitive use of electronic devices during consultations or if the student was very insecure, passive, and reluctant to take action or lacked social or language skills. While some GPs experienced StudentPEP as time-consuming and unnecessary, others argued that the tool promoted feedback and learning through mandatory observations and structured questions.ConclusionMutual trust builds a learning environment in which supervision and feedback may be given during students' clerkship in general practice. Structured tools may promote feedback, reflection and learning. Key PointsObserving the teacher and being supervised are essential components of Medical students' learning during general practice clerkships.Teachers and students build mutual trust in the familiarization phase.Good feedback is based on observations, is timely, encouraging, and instructive.StudentPEP may create an arena for structured feedback and reflection.

Background: Many medical students in general practice clerkships experience lack of observation-based feedback. The StudentPEP project combined written feedback from patients, observing teachers and students. Aim: This study analyzes the perceived usefulness of triangulated written feedback. Methods: A total of 71 general practitioners and 79 medical students at the University of Oslo completed project evaluation forms after a 6-week clerkship. A principal component analysis was performed to find structures within the questionnaire. Regression analysis was performed regarding students' answers to whether StudentPEP was worthwhile. Free-text answers were analyzed qualitatively.Results: Student and teacher responses were mixed within six subscales, with highest agreement on 'Teachers oral and written feedback' and 'Attitude to patient evaluation'. Fifty-four per cent of the students agreed that the triangulation gave concrete feedback on their weaknesses, and 59% valued the teachers' feedback provided. Two statements regarding the teacher's attitudes towards StudentPEP were significantly associated with the student's perception of worthwhileness. Qualitative analysis showed that patient evaluations were encouraging or distrusted. Some students thought that StudentPEP ensured observation and feedback. Conclusion: The patient evaluations increased the students' awareness of the patient perspective. A majority of the students considered the triangulated written feedback beneficial, although time-consuming. The teacher's attitudes strongly influenced how the students perceived the usefulness of StudentPEP.

Kunnskap, ledelse og kvalitet i studiet 1768 -70Kunnskapshåndtering, ledelse og kvalitetsforbedring -forkortet KLoK -er fra 2011 innført som eget fag i medisinstudiet i Oslo. Faget skal gi studentene kompetanse til å utøve legeyrket på en profesjonell måte, både som fagpersoner og som deltakere i grupper og team.

No abstract

Gi rask respons på artikler gjennom artikkelens kommentarfelt på tidsskriftet.no. Respons som er postet innen én måned etter at artikkelen er publisert, vurderes for publisering som Brev til redaktøren i papirutgaven. Redaksjonen forbeholder seg retten til å foreta redaksjonelle endringer. Forfattere av vitenskapelige artikler har tilsvarsrett, jf. Vancouver-gruppens regler.

No abstract