Dataset Information

Why is it so difficult to implement a longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum? A multicenter interview study on the barriers perceived by European health professions educators

ABSTRACT:

Background

Effective clinical reasoning is a core competency of health professionals that is necessary to assure patients’ safety. Unfortunately, adoption of longitudinal clinical reasoning curricula is still infrequent. This study explores the barriers that hinder the explicit teaching of clinical reasoning from a new international perspective.

Methods

The context of this study was a European project whose aim is to develop a longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum. We collected data in semi-structured interviews with responders from several European countries who represent various health professions and have different backgrounds, roles and experience. We performed a qualitative content analysis of the gathered data and constructed a coding frame using a combined deductive/inductive approach. The identified themes were validated by parallel coding and in group discussions among project members.

Results

A total of 29 respondents from five European countries participated in the interviews; the majority of them represent medicine and nursing sciences. We grouped the identified barriers into eight general themes: Time, Culture, Motivation, Clinical Reasoning as a Concept, Teaching, Assessment, Infrastructure and Others. Subthemes included issues with discussing errors and providing feedback, awareness of clinical reasoning teaching methods, and tensions between the groups of professionals involved.

Conclusions

This study provides an in-depth analysis of the barriers that hinder the teaching of explicit clinical reasoning. The opinions are presented from the perspective of several European higher education institutions. The identified barriers are complex and should be treated holistically due to the many interconnections between the identified barriers. Progress in implementation is hampered by the presence of reciprocal causal chains that aggravate this situation. Further research could investigate the perceptual differences between health professions regarding the barriers to clinical reasoning. The collected insights on the complexity and diversity of these barriers will help when rolling out a long-term agenda for overcoming the factors that inhibit the implementation of clinical reasoning curricula.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-021-02960-w.

SUBMITTER: Sudacka M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8588939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Exercise is recommended in guidelines for asthma management and has beneficial effects on symptom control, inflammation and lung function in patients with sub-optimally controlled asthma. Despite this, physical activity levels in patients with difficult asthma are often impaired. Understanding the barriers to exercise in people with difficult asthma is crucial for increasing their activity, and in implementing successful, disease modifying, and holistic approaches to improve their health. Methods:62 Patients within the WATCH Difficult Asthma Cohort (Southampton, UK) completed an Exercise Therapy Burden Questionnaire (ETBQ). The results were analyzed with contemporaneous asthma-related data to determine relationships between perceived exercise barriers and asthma and comorbidity characteristics. Results:Patients were reflective of a difficult asthma cohort, 66% were female, and 63% were atopic. They had a high BMI (median [inter-quartile range]) of 29.3 [25.5-36.2], age of 53.5 [38.75, 65.25], impaired spirometry with FEV1 73% predicted [59.5, 86.6%] and FEV/FVC ratio of 72 [56.5, 78.0] and poor symptom control, as defined by an Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ6) result of 2.4 [1.28, 3.2]. A high perceived barriers to exercise score was significantly correlated with increased asthma symptoms (r?=?0.452, p?<?0.0001), anxiety (r?=?0.375, p?=?0.005) and depression (r?=?0.363, p?=?0.008), poor quality of life (r?=?0.345, p?=?0.015) and number of rescue oral steroid courses in the past 12?months (r?=?0.257, p?=?0.048). Lung function, blood eosinophil count, FeNO, Njimegen and SNOT22 scores, BMI and hospitalisations in the previous year were not related to exercise perceptions. Conclusion:In difficult asthma, perceived barriers to exercise are related to symptom burden and psychological morbidity. Therefore, exercise interventions combined with psychological input such as CBT to restructure thought processes around these perceived barriers may be useful in facilitating adoption of exercise.

Project description:ImportanceInvesting in educators, educational innovation, and scholarship is essential for excellence in health professions education and health care. Funds for education innovations and educator development remain at significant risk because they virtually never generate offsetting revenue. A broader shared framework is needed to determine the value of such investments.ObjectiveTo explore the value factors using the value measurement methodology domains (individual, financial, operational, social or societal, strategic or political) that health professions leaders placed on educator investment programs, including intramural grants and endowed chairs.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with participants from an urban academic health professions institution and its affiliated systems that were conducted between June and September 2019 and were audio recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes with a constructivist orientation. Participants included 31 leaders at multiple levels of the organization (eg, deans, department chairs, and health system leaders) and with a range of experience. Individuals who did not respond initially were followed up with until a sufficient representation of leader roles was achieved.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes include value factors defined by the leaders for educator investment programs across the 5 value measurement methodology domains: individual, financial, operational, social or societal, and strategic or political.ResultsThis study included 29 leaders (5 [17%] campus or university leaders; 3 [10%] health systems leaders; 6 [21%] health professions school leaders; 15 [52%] department leaders). They identified value factors across the 5 value measurement methods domains. Individual factors emphasized the impact on faculty career, stature, and personal and professional development. Financial factors included tangible support, the ability to attract additional resources, and the importance of these investments as a monetary input rather than output. Operational factors identified educational programs and faculty recruitment or retention. Social and societal factors showcased scholarship and dissemination benefits to the external community beyond the organization and to the internal community of faculty, learners, and patients. Strategic and political factors highlighted impact on culture and symbolism, innovation, and organizational success.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that health sciences and health system leaders find value in funding educator investment programs in multiple domains beyond direct financial return on investment. These value factors can inform program design and evaluation, effective feedback to leaders, and advocacy for future investments. This approach can be used by other institutions to identify context-specific value factors.