Dataset Information

Implementation of a Novel Medical School Multidisciplinary and Interprofessional Oncology Curriculum: a Mixed Method Study.

ABSTRACT: As the population of patients with cancer and survivors grows, physician knowledge of oncology clinical care and research is increasingly important. Despite this patient population growth, medical students and non-oncology physicians report insufficient oncologic and survivorship care training. First-year students at a single US medical school completing a summer research experience were invited to participate in integrated Scholars in Oncology-Associated Research (SOAR) program. SOAR seeks to broaden students' understanding of multidisciplinary and interprofessional oncology clinical care and research. SOAR consists of three components: structured didactics, multidisciplinary tumor board attendance, and interprofessional shadowing. A mixed-methods approach investigated whether student knowledge improved after SOAR. Thirty-three students enrolled in SOAR (20 in 2015, 13 in 2016) and completed pre-assessments. Twenty-five (75.8%) students completed SOAR and post-assessments. Self-reported understanding of clinical (2[2, 3] vs. 4[4], p < 0.01) and research oncology (2[2, 3] vs. 4[4], p < 0.01) improved after SOAR. Understanding of individual disciplines also significantly improved. When describing clinical oncology, responses written post-SOAR were more comprehensive, averaging 3.7 themes per response vs. 2.8 on pre-assessments (p = 0.03). There were more references to "survivorship" as a component of oncology on post-assessments (0[0.0%] vs. 7[28.0%], p < 0.01) and "screening/prevention" (2[6.1%] vs. 7[28.0%], p = 0.03). Additionally, students more often described cancer care as a continuum on post-assessments (4[12.1%] vs. 11[44.0%], p = 0.01). A structured didactic and experiential introduction to oncology, SOAR, was successfully piloted. SOAR improved participant understanding of oncology and its distinct clinical and research disciplines. Future work will focus on expanding SOAR into a longitudinal oncology curriculum.

SUBMITTER: McKillip RP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5823720 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of a Novel Medical School Multidisciplinary and Interprofessional Oncology Curriculum: a Mixed Method Study.

McKillip Ryan P RP Hahn Olwen M OM Bartkowiak Bartlomiej B Rosenberg Carol A CA Olopade Olufunmilayo I OI Arora Vineet M VM Golden Daniel W DW

Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education 20190201 1

As the population of patients with cancer and survivors grows, physician knowledge of oncology clinical care and research is increasingly important. Despite this patient population growth, medical students and non-oncology physicians report insufficient oncologic and survivorship care training. First-year students at a single US medical school completing a summer research experience were invited to participate in integrated Scholars in Oncology-Associated Research (SOAR) program. SOAR seeks to b ...[more]

PMID: 28831669

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAn innovative patient-centred interprofessional communication concept with advanced lung cancer patients (Heidelberg Milestone Communication Approach, MCA) has been developed and implemented. Role changes and interprofessional communication are challenging in a busy outpatient oncology service. The aim of the study was to present attitudes to interprofessional collaboration of professions in thoracic oncology during the implementation of MCA and to explore factors and experiences healthcare team members associate with its implementation.MethodsIn a longitudinal study, 3 of the 4 subscales of the validated German translation of the University of the West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire (UWE-IP-D) were collected prior to implementation of MCA (t0) with follow-up data collections at 4 months (t1), 10 months (t2) and 17 months (t3). Descriptive analysis included calculating subscale sum scores and categorizing each subscale into positive, neutral and negative attitudes. Interviews and focus groups on implementation and interprofessional collaboration in the context of MCA were conducted with healthcare staff. The topics were analysed deductively, guided by the Professional Interactions factor of the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework.ResultsThe survey with 87 staff (44 nurses, 13 physicians, 12 psycho-social staff, 7 therapists, and 11 others) participating at least once found heterogeneous attitudes. 'Communication and Teamwork' and 'Interprofessional Relationships' were characterized by primarily positive attitudes. Neutral attitudes to 'Interprofessional Interaction' were indicated by the majority of respondents. There were no differences between collection times. Fifteen staff members participated in the interviews and focus groups. The main interprofessional interaction factors associated with implementation concerned the knowledge of the MCA and the impact of the intervention on team roles, on information sharing and on transfer processes between wards. Adaptive processes led to a shift in the perception of responsibilities and interprofessional collaboration.ConclusionsPositive experiences and potential shortfalls in the implementation were observed. Future introductions of interprofessional communication concepts require further activities which should address the attitudes of healthcare professionals towards interprofessional care.Trial registrationDRKS00013469 / Date of registration: 22/12/2017.

Project description:IntroductionMedical students often do not value attending in-person large group sessions. It is also not clear from prior research whether attendance at large group sessions impact on performance in medical school. The goal of this study was to assess the relationship between voluntary attendance in large group sessions organized as a "flipped classroom" in a new innovative curriculum and students' mastery of clinical applications of basic science knowledge.MethodologyOur students' ability to apply basic science knowledge to clinical problems is assessed via progress testing using three methodologies: a locally developed multiple-choice examination, written examination developed through the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Customized Assessment Services Program and post encounter questions included in a clinical skills examination. We analyzed the relationship between voluntary attendance at weekly large group "flipped classroom" sessions and the students' performance on examinations given at four intervals over the initial 24-week module of the medical school curriculum.ResultsComplete data were available for 167 students. A total of 82 students (49.1%) attended all large group sessions, 65 students (38.9%) missed one or two sessions and 20 students (12.0%) missed three or more sessions. There were no difference between the students in the groups on their medical admission (MCAT) examination scores. The growth in performance from each time point until the next was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference in growth between the students who had no absences and those who had one or two absences. Students who missed three or more sessions performed significantly lower than their peers over the 24 week module and were more likely to score one or more standard deviations below the class mean on the assessments.ConclusionsWe found no relationship between attendance and MCAT scores suggesting the differences in performance on the progress tests was not due to initial differences in knowledge or reasoning skills. While the study was not experimental, it suggests large group sessions using a "flipped classroom" approach to provide reinforcement, feedback and practice may be effective for increasing learning and retention in the application of basic science knowledge among first year medical students.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Few interventions have been designed that provide standardised information to primary care clinicians about the diagnostic and treatment recommendations resulting from cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) (tumour board) meetings. This study aimed to develop, implement and evaluate a standardised template for lung cancer MDTs to provide clinical information and treatment recommendations to general practitioners (GPs). Specific objectives were to (1) evaluate template feasibility (acceptability, appropriateness and timeliness) with GPs and (2) document processes of preimplementation, implementation and evaluation within the MDT setting. DESIGN:A mixed-method study design using structured interviews with GPs and qualitative documentation of project logs about implementation processes. SETTING:Two hospitals in Central Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. PARTICIPANTS:61 GPs evaluated the template. Two lung cancer MDTs, consisting of 33 clinicians, and eight researchers participated in template development and implementation strategy. RESULTS:The MDT-reporting template appears to be a feasible way of providing clinical information to GPs following patient presentation at a lung cancer MDT meeting. Ninety-five per cent of GPs strongly agreed or agreed that the standardised template provided useful and relevant information, that it was received in a timely manner (90%) and that the information was easy to interpret and communicate to the patient (84%). Implementation process data show that the investment made in the preimplementation stage to integrate the template into standard work practices was a critical factor in successful implementation. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that it is feasible to provide lung cancer MDT treatment recommendations to GPs through implementation of a standardised template. A simple intervention, such as a standardised template, can help to address quality gaps and ensure that timely information is communicated between tertiary and primary care healthcare providers.

Project description:BackgroundThere is agreement among educators and professional bodies that interprofessional education needs to be implemented at the pre-registration level. We performed a systematic review assessing interprofessional learning interventions, measuring attitudes towards interprofessional education and involving pre-registration medical students across all years of medical education.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed using PubMed, PsycINFO, EThOS, EMBASE, PEDro and SCOPUS. Search terms were composed of interprofession*, interprofessional education, inter professional, inter professionally, IPE, and medical student. Inclusion criteria were 1) the use of a validated scale for assessment of attitudes towards IPE, and results for more than 35 medical students; 2) peer-reviewed articles in English and German, including medical students; and 3) results for IPE interventions published after the 2011 Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) report. We identified and screened 3995 articles. After elimination of duplicates or non-relevant topics, 278 articles remained as potentially relevant for full text assessment. We used a data extraction form including study designs, training methods, participant data, assessment measures, results, and medical year of participants for each study. A planned comprehensive meta-analysis was not possible.ResultsThis systematic review included 23 articles with a pre-test-post-test design. Interventions varied in their type and topic. Duration of interventions varied from 25 min to 6 months, and interprofessional groups ranged from 2 to 25 students. Nine studies (39%) reported data from first-year medical students, five (22%) from second-year students, six (26%) from third-year students, two (9%) from fourth-year students and one (4%) from sixth-year students. There were no studies including fifth-year students. The most frequently used assessment method was the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) (n = 6, 26%). About half of study outcomes showed a significant increase in positive attitudes towards interprofessional education after interventions across all medical years.ConclusionsThis systematic review showed some evidence of a post-intervention change of attitudes towards IPE across different medical years studied. IPE was successfully introduced both in pre-clinical and clinical years of the medical curriculum. With respect to changes in attitudes to IPE, we could not demonstrate a difference between interventions delivered in early and later years of the curriculum.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42020160964 .

Dataset Information

Implementation of a Novel Medical School Multidisciplinary and Interprofessional Oncology Curriculum: a Mixed Method Study.

Publications

Implementation of a Novel Medical School Multidisciplinary and Interprofessional Oncology Curriculum: a Mixed Method Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets