Dataset Information

Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Vertically integrating physiology into patient care has the potential to improve clinical reasoning. Clinical Physiology Grand Rounds (CPGR) is a case-based teaching method that brings together students from all years of medical school to focus on linking clinical presentations to core basic science concepts including anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology. In this study, we describe the implementation of CPGR at two different institutions in the United States and assess student-reported outcomes.Methods: We survey students who participated in CPGR at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons (P&S) and Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). Subjects were queried across three domains: the benefits of attending, the impact of concept maps, and the impact of the mixed-learner environment.Results: Despite differences in session leadership and the underlying medical school curricula, conference attendees reported similar benefits at the two schools included in this study. Students overwhelmingly (92.9%) reported that remembering clinical presentations was easier when they understood the underlying physiology. They also reported gaining a true understanding of concepts that were previously memorized (87.5%). Both clinical (92.5%) and preclinical students (93.1%) valued the mixed-learner environment as a component of the conference.Discussion: By assuring a mixed-learner environment with near-peer interactions, using concept maps as a teaching tool, and rigorously linking clinical presentation and management to physiological concepts, we found that the key benefits of CPGR were replicable across different institutions, despite several local differences in how CPGR was implemented, led, and conducted.

SUBMITTER: Langer AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8204959 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ProblemAs biomedical research and clinical medicine become increasingly complex, physician-scientists and clinically oriented biomedical researchers play important roles in bridging the gap between disciplines. A lack of educational programming that addresses the unique needs of students preparing for careers at the interface of basic science and clinical medicine may contribute to trainee attrition.ApproachThe MD-PhD/LHB Grand Rounds was introduced in 2008 as a trainee-driven collaborative effort of the Harvard/Massachusetts Institute of Technology MD-PhD program at Harvard Medical School (HMS MD-PhD program), Harvard's Leder Human Biology and Translational Medicine (LHB) program, and the Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) Internal Medicine Department. Each of the program's approximately 4 sessions per year begins with dinner, followed by a clinical case presentation led by a BWH MD-PhD resident with a master clinician faculty discussant, then a research presentation by an LHB PhD student or an MD-PhD student on a basic science topic related to the clinical case, and time for socialization.OutcomesIn a July 2017 survey of participating students and residents, respondents reported being highly satisfied with the program. Mean satisfaction ratings were 4.3 (SD 0.5) for 12 MD-PhD students, 4.2 (SD 0.7) for 31 LHB students, and 4.4 (SD 0.9) for 5 residents on a 5-point scale (5 = very satisfied). Free-text responses suggested MD-PhD students valued opportunities for active engagement with the resident presenter and faculty discussant. LHB students appreciated the absence of medical jargon in the clinical presentations. Residents' reported reasons for participating included enjoyment of teaching and interaction with students.Next stepsThe Harvard MD-PhD/LHB Grand Rounds can serve as a template for developing similar programs at other institutions. Research is needed to determine whether such grand rounds programs can help fix the leaky pipeline in the training of future physician-scientists and clinically oriented biomedical researchers.

Project description:BackgroundMany public health programs fail because of an inability to implement tested interventions in diverse, complex settings. The field of implementation science is engaged in developing strategies for successful implementation, but current training is primarily researcher-focused. To tackle the challenges of the twenty-first century, public health leaders are promoting a new model titled Public Health 3.0 where public health practitioners become "chief health strategists" and develop interdisciplinary skills for multisector engagement to achieve impact. This requires broad training for public health practitioners in implementation science that includes the allied fields of systems and design thinking, quality improvement, and innovative evaluation methods. At UNC Chapel Hill's Gillings School of Global Public Health, we created an interdisciplinary set of courses in applied implementation science for Master of Public Health (MPH) students and public health practitioners. We describe our rationale, conceptual approach, pedagogy, courses, and initial results to assist other schools contemplating similar programs.MethodsOur conceptual approach recognized the vital relationship between implementation research and practice. We conducted a literature review of thought leaders in public health to identify skill areas related to implementation science that are priorities for the future workforce. We also reviewed currently available training programs in implementation science to understand their scope and objectives and to assess whether any of these would be a fit for these priorities. We used a design focused implementation framework to create four linked courses drawing from multiple fields such as engineering, management, and the social sciences and emphasizing application through case studies. We validated the course content by mapping them to implementation science competencies in the literature.ResultsTo date, there is no other program that provides comprehensive interdisciplinary skills in applied implementation science for MPH students. As of April 2018, we have offered a total of eleven sections of the four courses, with a total enrollment of 142, of whom 127 have been master's-level students in the school of public health. Using Kirkpatrick's Model, we found positive student reaction, learning, and behavior. Many students have completed applied implementation science focused practicums, master's papers, and special studies.ConclusionsA systematically designed interdisciplinary curriculum in applied implementation science for MPH students has been found by students to be a useful set of skills. Students have demonstrated the capability to master this material and incorporate it into their practicums and master's papers.

Dataset Information

Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets