Judy Watt-Watson1, Leila Lax2, Robyn Davies3, Sylvia Langlois4, Jon Oskarsson1, Lalitha Raman-Wilms5. 1. Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing. 2. Biomedical Communications, Institute of Medical Science. 3. Department of Physical Therapy. 4. Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy. 5. Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
Objective: Although the University of Toronto Centre for the Study of Pain has successfully implemented an Interfaculty Pain Curriculum since 2002, we have never formalized the process in a design model. Therefore, our primary aim was to develop a model that provided an overview of dynamic, interrelated elements that have been important in our experience. A secondary purpose was to use the model to frame an interactive workshop for attendees interested in developing their own pain curricula. Methods: The faculties from Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, Occupational Therapy, Pharmacy, and Physical Therapy met to develop the model components. Discussion focused on patient-centered pain assessment and management in an interprofessional context, with pain content being based on the International Association for the Study of Pain-Interprofessional Pain Curriculum domains and related core pain competencies. Profession-specific requirements were also considered, including regulatory/course requirements, level of students involved, type of course delivery, and pedagogic strategies. Results: The resulting Pain Interprofessional Curriculum Design Model includes components that are dynamic, competency-based, collaborative, and interrelated. Key questions important to developing curricular components guide the process. The Model framed two design workshops with very positive responses from international and national attendees. Conclusions: The Pain Interprofessional Curriculum Design Model is based on established pain curricula and related competencies that are relevant to all health science students at the prelicensure (entry-to-practice) level. The model has been developed from our experience, and the components resonated with workshop attendees from other regions. This Model provides a basis for future interventions in curriculum design and evaluation.
Objective: Although the University of Toronto Centre for the Study of Pain has successfully implemented an Interfaculty Pain Curriculum since 2002, we have never formalized the process in a design model. Therefore, our primary aim was to develop a model that provided an overview of dynamic, interrelated elements that have been important in our experience. A secondary purpose was to use the model to frame an interactive workshop for attendees interested in developing their own pain curricula. Methods: The faculties from Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, Occupational Therapy, Pharmacy, and Physical Therapy met to develop the model components. Discussion focused on patient-centered pain assessment and management in an interprofessional context, with pain content being based on the International Association for the Study of Pain-Interprofessional Pain Curriculum domains and related core pain competencies. Profession-specific requirements were also considered, including regulatory/course requirements, level of students involved, type of course delivery, and pedagogic strategies. Results: The resulting Pain Interprofessional Curriculum Design Model includes components that are dynamic, competency-based, collaborative, and interrelated. Key questions important to developing curricular components guide the process. The Model framed two design workshops with very positive responses from international and national attendees. Conclusions: The Pain Interprofessional Curriculum Design Model is based on established pain curricula and related competencies that are relevant to all health science students at the prelicensure (entry-to-practice) level. The model has been developed from our experience, and the components resonated with workshop attendees from other regions. This Model provides a basis for future interventions in curriculum design and evaluation.