Mentoring program design and implementation in new medical schools.

PURPOSE: Mentoring is considered a valuable component of undergraduate medical education with a variety of programs at established medical schools. This study presents how new medical schools have set up mentoring programs as they have developed their curricula. METHODS: Administrators from 14 US medical schools established since 2006 were surveyed regarding the structure and implementation of their mentoring programs. RESULTS: The majority of new medical schools had mentoring programs that varied in structure and implementation. Although the programs were viewed as valuable at each institution, challenges when creating and implementing mentoring programs in new medical schools included time constraints for faculty and students, and lack of financial and professional incentives for faculty. CONCLUSIONS: Similar to established medical schools, there was little uniformity among mentoring programs at new medical schools, likely reflecting differences in curriculum and program goals. Outcome measures are needed to determine whether a best practice for mentoring can be established.

Patient communication simulation laboratory for students in an acute care nurse practitioner program.

BACKGROUND: Effective communication skills for clinical practice are essential for all advanced practice nurses. However, competence in these skills is not necessarily intuitive. Advanced communication skills should be taught in a way that is similar to the way other psychomotor skills in advanced nursing practice programs are taught. OBJECTIVES: To develop a patient communication simulation laboratory for the acute care nurse practitioner program at a major university and to evaluate students' perceived confidence and communication effectiveness before and immediately as well as 4 months after completion of the laboratory. METHODS: The communication simulation laboratory was developed in collaboration with faculty from the schools of nursing and medicine. Students participated in a didactic session and then completed a 2-hour communication simulation in the laboratory. Content and simulation concentrated on breaking "bad news," empathetic communication, motivational interviewing, and the "angry" patient. Students' self-reported confidence and perceived skill in communication were measured via a Likert scale before, immediately after, and 4 months after completion of the laboratory simulation. Students also evaluated the experience by responding to open-ended questions. RESULTS: Compared with baseline findings (before the lecture and simulation), students' confidence in initiating difficult conversations increased significantly both immediately (P<.001) and 4 months after (P=.001) the laboratory simulation. Students' self-ratings of overall ability to communicate were also significantly greater immediately (P<.001) and 4 months (P=.001) after the simulation. Overall, students rated the laboratory simulation experience highly beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: The content and methods used for the simulation improved students' confidence and perceived skill in communication in potentially difficult acute care situations.

Quality of standardised patient research reports in the medical education literature: review and recommendations.

CONTEXT: In order to assess or replicate the research findings of published reports, authors must provide adequate and transparent descriptions of their methods. We conducted 2 consecutive studies, the first to define reporting standards relating to the use of standardised patients (SPs) in research, and the second to evaluate the current literature according to these standards. METHODS: Standards for reporting SPs in research were established by representatives of the Grants and Research Committee of the Association of Standardized Patient Educators (ASPE). An extensive literature search yielded 177 relevant English-language articles published between 1993 and 2005. Search terms included: 'standardised patient(s)'; 'simulated patient(s)'; 'objective structured clinical examination (OSCE)', and 'clinical skills assessment'. Articles were limited to those reporting the use of SPs as an outcome measure and published in 1 of 5 prominent health sciences education journals. Data regarding the SP encounter, SP characteristics, training and behavioural measure(s) were gathered. RESULTS: A random selection of 121 articles was evaluated according to 29 standards. Reviewers judged that few authors provided sufficient details regarding the encounter (21%, n = 25), SPs (16%, n = 19), training (15%, n = 15), and behavioural measures (38%, n = 44). Authors rarely reported SP gender (27%, n = 33) and age range (22%, n = 26), whether training was provided for the SPs (39%, n = 47) or other raters (24%, n = 29), and psychometric evidence to support the behavioural measure (23%, n = 25). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that there is a need for increased rigor in reporting research involving SPs. In order to support the validity of research findings, journal editors, reviewers and authors are encouraged to provide adequate detail when describing SP methodology.

Development of communication skills workshop for oncology advanced practice nursing students.

BACKGROUND: Communication skills have not traditionally been included in nursing curriculum. The best educational method to improve health care providers' practice in communication skills is first, introduction of content, followed by continuous skills assessment and mentored feedback. METHODS: A communication skills workshop using standardized patients (SPs) was planned for oncology nurse practitioner students. A 6-step development plan was used to design, implement, and evaluate the curriculum. Three patient cases using SPs were developed to represent a specific communication skill. SP teaching methodology is relatively new to nursing curriculum. RESULTS. Four methods of evaluation revealed a high level of satisfaction with the course, a high level of communications skills demonstrated during the course, and student need to have more communication content throughout their curriculum. Confidence in communication skills increased following the workshop. CONCLUSIONS: This methodology has widespread application to other areas of cancer nursing including nurses with less oncology experience and practicing nurses on the oncology units. In addition, there is application throughout nursing curriculum for undergraduate and graduate programs. The content should be presented earlier in the curriculum and then reinforced throughout the remaining courses with clinical follow-up.