Literature DB >> 12431938

Medical students, clinical preventive services, and shared decision-making.

Carole W Keefe1, Margaret E Thompson, Mary Margaret Noel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Improving access to preventive care requires addressing patient, provider, and systems barriers. Patients often lack knowledge or are skeptical about the importance of prevention. Physicians feel that they have too little time, are not trained to deliver preventive services, and are concerned about the effectiveness of prevention. We have implemented an educational module in the required family practice clerkship (1) to enhance medical student learning about common clinical preventive services and (2) to teach students how to inform and involve patients in shared decision making about those services. DESCRIPTION: Students are asked to examine available evidence-based information for preventive screening services. They are encouraged to look at the recommendations of various organizations and use such resources as reports from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to determine recommendations they want to be knowledgeable about in talking with their patients. For learning shared decision making, students are trained to use a model adapted from Braddock and colleagues(1) to discuss specific screening services and to engage patients in the process of making informed decisions about what is best for their own health. The shared decision making is presented and modeled by faculty, discussed in small groups, and students practice using Web-based cases and simulations. The students are evaluated using formative and summative performance-based assessments as they interact with simulated patients about (1) screening for high blood cholesterol and other lipid abnormalities, (2) screening for colorectal cancer, (3) screening for prostate cancer, and (4) screening for breast cancer. The final student evaluation is a ten-minute, videotaped discussion with a simulated patient about screening for colorectal cancer that is graded against a checklist that focuses primarily on the elements of shared decision making. DISCUSSION: Our medical students appear quite willing to accept shared decision making as a skill that they should have in working with patients, and this was the primary focus of the newly implemented module. However, we have learned that students need to deepen their understanding of screening services in order to help patients understand the associated benefits and risks. The final videotaped interaction with a simulated patient about colorectal cancer screening has been very helpful in making it more obvious to faculty what students believe and know about screening for colorectal cancer. As the students are asked to discuss clinical issues with patients and discuss the pros and cons of screening tests as part of the shared decision-making process, their thinking becomes transparent and it is evident where curricular changes and enhancements are required. We have found that an explicit model that allows students to demonstrate a process for shared decision making is a good introductory tool. We think it would be helpful to provide students with more formative feedback. We would like to develop faculty development programs around shared decision making so that more of our clinical faculty would model such a process with patients. Performance-based assessments are resource-intensive, but they appear to be worth the added effort in terms of enhanced skills development and a more comprehensive appraisal of student learning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12431938     DOI: 10.1097/00001888-200211000-00026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  8 in total

1.  Effects of personal characteristics on African-American women's beliefs about breast cancer.

Authors:  Terrell W Zollinger; Victoria L Champion; Patrick O Monahan; Susan K Steele-Moses; Kim W Ziner; Qianqian Zhao; Sara A Bourff; Robert M Saywell; Kathleen M Russell
Journal:  Am J Health Promot       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug

2.  Factors associated with the difference in score between women's and doctors' decisional conflict about hormone therapy: a multilevel regression analysis.

Authors:  France Légaré; Stéphane Tremblay; Annette M O'Connor; Ian D Graham; Georges A Wells; Mary Jane Jacobsen
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Interventions for improving medical students' interpersonal communication in medical consultations.

Authors:  Conor Gilligan; Martine Powell; Marita C Lynagh; Bernadette M Ward; Chris Lonsdale; Pam Harvey; Erica L James; Dominique Rich; Sari P Dewi; Smriti Nepal; Hayley A Croft; Jonathan Silverman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-02-08

4.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.

Authors:  Karine Gravel; France Légaré; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 7.327

Review 5.  Shared decision making in peri-operative medicine: Miles to go in Indian scenario.

Authors:  G V Krishna Prasad
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-09-26

6.  Willingness to provide behavioral health recommendations: a cross-sectional study of entering medical students.

Authors:  Stephen A McCurdy
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 2.463

7.  Clinical decision-making: physicians' preferences and experiences.

Authors:  Elizabeth Murray; Lance Pollack; Martha White; Bernard Lo
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2007-03-15       Impact factor: 2.497

8.  Using a formative simulated patient exercise for curriculum evaluation.

Authors:  David J Solomon; Heather S Laird-Fick; Carole W Keefe; Margaret E Thompson; Mary Margaret Noel
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2004-05-12       Impact factor: 2.463

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.