Paving the Way Forward for Evidence-Based Continuing Professional Development.

ABSTRACT: Continuing professional development (CPD) fosters lifelong learning and enables health care providers to keep their knowledge and skills current with rapidly evolving health care practices. Instructional methods promoting critical thinking and decision making contribute to effective CPD interventions. The delivery methods influence the uptake of content and the resulting changes in knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behavior. Educational approaches are needed to ensure that CPD meets the changing needs of health care providers. This article examines the development approach and key recommendations embedded in a CE Educator's toolkit created to evolve CPD practice and foster a learning experience that promotes self-awareness, self-reflection, competency, and behavioral change. The Knowledge-to-Action framework was used in designing the toolkit. The toolkit highlighted three intervention formats: facilitation of small group learning, case-based learning, and reflective learning. Strategies and guidelines to promote active learning principles in CPD activities within different modalities and learning contexts were included. The goal of the toolkit is to assist CPD providers to design educational activities that optimally support health care providers' self-reflection and knowledge translation into their clinical environment and contribute to practice improvement, thus achieving the outcomes of the quintuple aim.

Exploring medical students' barriers to reporting mistreatment during clerkships: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread implementation of policies to address mistreatment, the proportion of medical students who experience mistreatment during clinical training is significantly higher than the proportion of students who report mistreatment. Understanding barriers to reporting mistreatment from students' perspectives is needed before effective interventions can be implemented to improve the clinical learning environment. OBJECTIVE: We explored medical students' reasons for not reporting perceived mistreatment or abuse experienced during clinical clerkships at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA (DGSOM). DESIGN: This was a sequential two-phase qualitative study. In the first phase, we analyzed institutional survey responses to an open-ended questionnaire administered to the DGSOM graduating classes of 2013-2015 asking why students who experienced mistreatment did not seek help or report incidents. In the second phase, we conducted focus group interviews with third- and fourth-year medical students to explore their reasons for not reporting mistreatment. In total, 30 of 362 eligible students participated in five focus groups. On the whole, 63% of focus group participants felt they had experienced mistreatment, of which over half chose not to report to any member of the medical school administration. Transcripts were analyzed via inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The following major themes emerged: fear of reprisal even in the setting of anonymity; perception that medical culture includes mistreatment; difficulty reporting more subtle forms of mistreatment; incident is not important enough to report; reporting process damages the student-teacher relationship; reporting process is too troublesome; and empathy with the source of mistreatment. Differing perceptions arose as students debated whether or not reporting was beneficial to the clinical learning environment. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple complex factors deeply rooted in the culture of medicine, along with negative connotations associated with reporting, prevent students from reporting incidents of mistreatment. Further research is needed to establish interventions that will help identify mistreatment and change the underlying culture.

Relationship between medical student perceptions of mistreatment and mistreatment sensitivity.

BACKGROUND: National statistics reveal that efforts to reduce medical student mistreatment have been largely ineffective. Some hypothesize that as supervisors gain skills in professionalism, medical students become more sensitive. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to determine if medical student perceptions of mistreatment are correlated with mistreatment sensitivity. METHOD: At the end of their third year, 175 medical students completed an Abuse Sensitivity Questionnaire, focused on student assessment of hypothetical scenarios which might be perceived as abusive, and the annual Well-Being Survey, which includes measurement of incident rates of mistreatment. It was hypothesized that those students who identified the scenarios as abusive would also be more likely to perceive that they had been mistreated. RESULTS: Student perceptions of mistreatment were not statistically correlated with individual's responses to the scenarios or to a statistically derived abuse sensitivity variable. There were no differences in abuse sensitivity by student age or ethnicity. Women were more likely than men to consider it "harsh" to be called incompetent during rounds (p < 0.0005). CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence that challenges the hypothesis that medical students who perceive mistreatment by their superiors are simply more sensitive.

Eradicating medical student mistreatment: a longitudinal study of one institution's efforts.

PURPOSE: Since 1995, the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA (DGSOM) has created policies to prevent medical student mistreatment, instituted safe mechanisms for reporting mistreatment, provided resources for discussion and resolution, and educated faculty and residents. In this study, the authors examined the incidence, severity, and sources of perceived mistreatment over the 13-year period during which these measures were implemented. METHOD: From 1996 to 2008, medical students at DGSOM completed an anonymous survey after their third-year clerkships and reported how often they experienced physical, verbal, sexual harassment, ethnic, and power mistreatment, and who committed it. The authors analyzed these data using descriptive statistics and the students' descriptions of these incidents qualitatively, categorizing them as "mild," "moderate," or "severe." They compared the data across four periods, delineated by milestone institutional measures to eradicate mistreatment. RESULTS: Of 2,151 eligible students, 1,946 (90%) completed the survey. More than half (1,166/1,946) experienced some form of mistreatment. Verbal and power mistreatment were most common, but 5% of students (104/1,930) reported physical mistreatment. The pattern of incidents categorized as "mild," "moderate," or "severe" remained across the four study periods. Students most frequently identified residents and clinical faculty as the sources of mistreatment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a multipronged approach at DGSOM across a 13-year period to eradicate medical student mistreatment, it persists. Aspects of the hidden curriculum may be undermining these efforts. Thus, eliminating mistreatment requires an aggressive approach both locally at the institution level and nationally across institutions.