| Literature DB >> 22906234 |
Angela L Jefferson1, Nicole G Cantwell, Laura K Byerly, Darby Morhardt.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As life expectancy increases, dementia incidence will also increase, creating a greater need for physicians well-trained to provide integrated geriatric care. However, research suggests medical students have limited knowledge or interest in pursuing geriatric or dementia care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the PAIRS Program and its effectiveness in enhancing medical education as a service-learning activity and replication model for the Buddy ProgramTM.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22906234 PMCID: PMC3500260 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-12-80
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Sample characteristics
| Age, years | 24 ± 3 | 23 ± 3† | 0.19 |
| Sex, % female | 58 | 50 | 0.49 |
| Race, % White | 53 | -- | -- |
| Ethnicity, % Hispanic/Latino | 3 | -- | -- |
| Education, years | 16 ± 1 | 16 ± 1 | 0.64 |
| Professional experience with AD patient prior to program, % yes | 49 | 47 | 0.87 |
| Personal/familial familiarity with AD prior to program, % yes | 33 | 44 | 0.33 |
| Monthly interactions, total | 5 ± 1 | -- | -- |
| Remained in contact with buddy post-program, % yes | 62 | -- | -- |
Note. Data presented as mean ± SD or %; blank cells (−−) reflect that information was not collected or did not apply to applicants not admitted to the program; † = age information was available on a subset of applicants (n = 19).
Dementia knowledge test performance
| Buddy Program Knowledge Test† | 26.5 ± 2.4 | 28.9 ± 1.9 | <0.001 |
| PAIRS Program Dementia Knowledge Test‡ | 40.4 ± 5.5 | 44.9 ± 4.3 | <0.001 |
Note. Data presented as mean ± SD; † = analyses based on n = 45 participants; ‡ = analyses based on n = 23 participants.
Reflective essay themes
| Reasons for joining | Reasons why students became interested in and decided to join the |
| Previous scientific knowledge of AD | Students' knowledge of the pathophysiology and treatment modalities of AD prior to participation in the program |
| Previous personal experience with AD patient | Students’ previous experience interacting with an individual with AD prior to participation in the program |
| Initial impressions of buddy | Students' initial impressions of buddy and concerns for their initial interaction |
| Observation of AD symptoms | Interactions with their buddy allowed students to observe symptoms of AD in the home and in public settings |
| Greater understanding of AD | Through participation in the |
| Care partner burden | Student’s perception of how the care partner deals with their loved one's diagnosis, the role the care partner plays in the buddy’s life, and the emotional and physical toll of providing such care |
| Human side of AD | The students now view AD as a total life-changing situation, not just a clinical diagnosis, and learned to address the person in addition to the symptoms of the disease |
| Buddy and care partner's hopeful outlook towards having AD | The buddy and care partner’s optimistic approaches to coping with AD and maintaining a fulfilling life |
| Educational value of monthly program meetings | Monthly program luncheons provided an educational forum and the opportunity to learn through the shared experiences of fellow students |
| Program impact on clinical practice | Students feel the program has changed the way they will practice as physicians, impacting their attitudes toward patients and their approach to providing care |
| Influence on medical specialization |