No abstract

Medical students must learn how to practice high‐value, cost‐conscious care. By modifying the traditional SOAP (Subjective‐Objective‐Assessment‐Plan) presentation to include a discussion of value (SOAP‐V), we developed a cognitive forcing function designed to promote discussion of high‐value, cost‐conscious care during patient delivery. The SOAP‐V model prompts the student to consider (1) the evidence that supports a test or treatment, (2) the patient's preferences and values, and (3) the financial cost of a test or treatment compared to alternatives. Students report their findings to their teams during patient care rounds. This tool has been successfully used at 3 medical schools. Preliminary results find that students who have been trained in SOAP‐V feel more empowered to address the economic healthcare crisis, are more comfortable in initiating discussions about value, and are more likely to consider potential costs to the healthcare system. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:217–220. © 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine

BACKGROUND: In the rapidly changing landscape of undergraduate medical education (UME), the roles and responsibilities of clerkship directors (CDs) are not clear. OBJECTIVE: To describe the current roles and responsibilities of Internal Medicine CDs. DESIGN: National annual Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty-nine clerkship directors at all Liaison Committee on Medical Education accredited US medical schools with CDIM membership as of September 1, 2017. MAIN MEASURES: Responsibilities of core CDs, including oversight of other faculty, and resources available to CDs including financial support and dedicated time.KEY RESULT: The survey response rate was 83% (107/ 129). Ninety-four percent of the respondents oversaw the core clerkship inpatient experience, while 47.7% (n = 51) and 5.6% (n = 6) oversaw the outpatient and longitudinal integrated clerkships respectively. In addition to oversight, CDs were responsible for curriculum development, evaluation and grades, remediation, scheduling, student mentoring, and faculty development. Less than one-third of CDs (n = 33) received the recommended 0.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) support for their roles, and 15% (n = 16) had less than 20% FTE support. An average 0.41 FTE (SD .2) was spent in clinical work and 0.20 FTE (SD .21) in administrative duties. Eighty-three percent worked with other faculty who assisted in the oversight of departmental UME experiences, with FTE support varying by role and institution. Thirty-five percent of CDs (n = 38) had a dedicated budget for managing their clerkship. CONCLUSIONS: The responsibilities of CDs have increased in both number and complexity since the dissemination of previous guidelines for expectations of and for CDs in 2003. However, resources available to them have not substantially changed.

Introduction: We created a curriculum to help new physicians and nurses develop skills in interprofessional collaboration. This modular, team-based curriculum for early practitioners delivered training in the five following skill areas: listening for meaning, soliciting another's perspective, negotiating a transparent plan of care, attending to nonverbal communication and microaggression, and speaking up the hierarchy. Methods: We brought first-year medical and surgical residents and new nurses together for a 2-hour session monthly for 5 months. Each session began with an interactive large-group presentation, followed by small-group activities covering one of the five skill areas above, which had been identified as critical to interprofessional collaboration by national organizations. We measured relational coordination (RC), a validated measure of how well teams work together, before and after the curriculum was administered. We also obtained qualitative data from participant interviews and end-of-session evaluations. Results: Participants reported that the program helped them gain an understanding of each other's roles and workflow challenges. They felt that the curriculum allowed for the cultivation of professional relationships outside the clinical environment, which improved collegiality via gains in rapport and empathy towards each other. Nurses noted increased approachability of their physician colleagues after participation. RC scores improved for the entire cohort (p = .0232). Nurses had statistically higher RC gains than interns did (p = .0055). Discussion: Curriculum participants demonstrated improved RC scores and reported increased rapport with and empathy for each other. Curriculum development in this area is important because it may lead to better team-based patient care.

No abstract