Examining the Impact of Dialogic Learning on Critically Reflective Practice.

PURPOSE: While research is beginning to reveal the potential of dialogue in sparking critical reflection (critically reflective ways of seeing), additional research is needed to guide the teaching of critical reflection toward enabling critically reflective practice (critically reflective ways of seeing and doing). An experimental study was conducted to investigate the impact of dialogic learning on critically reflective practice, compared to discussion-based learning. The dialogic intervention integrated the theory of Mikhail Bakhtin with the theory of critical reflection and critical disability studies. METHOD: In interprofessional groups of 4, medical, occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology students were randomly assigned to a learning condition that used a reflective discussion or critically reflective dialogue about a pediatric patient case. All participants were then randomly assigned a clinical report for a novel pediatric patient and asked to write a hypothetical clinical letter to the child's school. Hierarchical logistic regression models were constructed to estimate the probabilities of sentences and letters being critically reflective. RESULTS: The probability of sentences being critically reflective was significantly higher for the dialogue condition (0.26, 95% CI [0.2, 0.33]), compared to the discussion condition (0.11, 95% CI [0.07, 0.15]). Likewise, the probability of letters being critically reflective was significantly higher for the dialogue condition (0.26, 95% CI [0.15, 0.4]), compared to the discussion condition (0.04, 95% CI [0.01, 0.16]). In both conditions, the probability of a letter being critically reflective was positively associated with the proportion of critically reflective sentences. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate dialogic learning prepared students to enact critically reflective practice when writing mock clinical letters. Students who participated in a dialogue engaged in a collaborative process of critical reflection and subsequently applied that way of seeing in the individual act of writing a letter. This study highlights how Bakhtin's theory of dialogue can advance critical pedagogy.

The Powers of a Fish: Clinical Thinking, Humanistic Thinking, and Different Ways of Knowing.

How are ways of knowing similar between clinical reasoning and the humanities, and can the latter be used to elucidate the former? This commentary considers a conceptual model proposed by Prince and colleagues in this issue to explore the different ways of knowing in art and medicine. Their proposed model links 2 approaches to clinical reasoning with an analytic approach said to be characteristic of the humanities-visual thinking strategies (VTS)-to teach skills in clinical reasoning. They suggest that the VTS approach aligns well with the 2 clinical reasoning approaches and use this relationship to argue for the introduction of the humanities into graduate medical education. However, is VTS truly an exemplar of analytic approaches used in the humanities? The approach to clinical decision making is a version of what Donald A. Schön calls technical rationality, but what is the epistemology used in the humanities and art? This commentary explores this question through the perspective of hermeneutics, a branch of philosophy that centers on an interpretive understanding of art, and through art, a way of knowing the self, others, and the world. In contrast to limiting the focus of the humanities in medical education to sharpening the powers of observation and analytical thinking, the author argues that art also offers a way to explore the challenges and triumphs of providing care to those in need and to explore the meanings, feelings, and experiences of living and dying. It offers a way of understanding and expressing the moral dilemmas of our time that aspires toward the aesthetic, philosophical, and existential truths of a life in medicine.

Discomfort, Doubt, and the Edge of Learning.

Discomfort is a constant presence in the practice of medicine and an oft-ignored feature of medical education. Nonetheless, if approached with thoughtfulness, patience, and understanding, discomfort may play a critical role in the education of physicians who practice with excellence, compassion, and justice. Taking Plato's notion of aporia-a moment of discomfort, perplexity, or impasse-as a starting point, the author follows the meandering path of aporia through Western philosophy and educational theory to argue for the importance of discomfort in opening up and orienting perspectives toward just and humanistic practice. Practical applications of this approach include problem-posing questions (from the work of Brazilian education theorist Paulo Freire), exercises to "make strange" beliefs and assumptions that are taken for granted, and the use of stories-especially stories without endings-all of which may prompt reflection and dialogical exchange. Framing this type of teaching and learning in Russian psychologist L.S. Vygotsky's theories of development, the author proposes that mentorship and dialogical interactions may help learners to navigate through moments of discomfort and uncertainty and extend the edge of learning. This approach may give birth to a zone of proximal development that is enriched with explorations of self, others, and the world.

Paradox of Patient-Centered Care and the Implications for Patient Involvement in Continuing Professional Development.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-centered care (PCC) is widely considered as essential in chronic disease management. As the underlying rationale for engaging patients in continuing professional development (CPD) is commonly described as fostering care that is more patient-centered, we hoped to understand the discursive conditions for how educators and health professionals can (or cannot) learn with, from, and about patients. METHODS: Using diabetes as a case, we conducted a Foucauldian discourse analysis of an archive of relevant policy documents, professional and educational texts, to explore different conceptualizations of practice and the implications for PCC. We also conducted in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of physicians to understand their experiences in providing and teaching PCC. We sought to understand: How has PCC been discursively constructed? Whose interests does advocating PCC serve? What are the implications for patient involvement in CPD? RESULTS: We describe three discursive constructions of PCC, each extending the reach of biomedical power. PCC as a disease intervention emphasizes knowing and relating to patients to normalize laboratory test results. PCC as a form of confession promotes patients to come to their own realizations to become responsible for their own health, but through the lens and evaluation of physicians. PCC as a disciplinary technique makes visible the possibility of using a checklist to judge physician competency in providing PCC. DISCUSSION: PCC may be constructed in ways that paradoxically reinforce rather than challenge conventional, provider-centric paradigms. Our results challenge educators to acknowledge the existence and effects of discourses when involving patients in the planning and delivery of CPD.

Stories in the Time of COVID-19.

The time of COVID-19 is the time of storytelling-stories of chaos, loss, and despair, but also of victories large and small, acts of kindness, and deep connections. Stories are a way to pass on meaning from one person to another, among communities, and across generations. COVID-19 stories are being used in the education of physicians, but for whose benefit and to what end? What if the "heroic" frontline worker is experiencing burnout or working out of necessity rather than by choice? What if the battle against an invisible enemy does not end triumphantly but becomes an interminable war of attrition? It is important not only to propose new questions but also to create spaces for stories that do not fit conveniently into standard narratives. Stories help foster the energy and drive to write about what is next and to act as physicians in the service of human beings and their lives.

Professionalism revisited during the pandemics of our time: COVID-19 and racism.

In this article the authors review the current-day definition of professionalism through the lens of the two ongoing pandemics: COVID-19 and racism. The pandemics have led to contemporary practice-related questions, such as: does professionalism entail that health care providers (HCP) be compelled to treat patients without PPE or if patients refuse to wear masks? And what role do HCP play in society when confronted with glaring health disparities and police brutality? The authors propose using care ethics as a theory to view professionalism, as it takes into account broadly encompassing relationships between HCP and society, history and context. Professionalism viewed through a care ethics lens would require professionalism definitions to be expanded to allow for interventions, i.e., not just refrain from doing harm but actively interfere or take action if wrong is being witnessed. Principles related to the primacy of patient welfare need to be re-addressed to prevent systematic self-sacrifice which results in harm to HCP and burnout. Mature care should be a characteristic of professionalism ensuring that HCP care for the sick but be practically wise, highlighting the importance of balancing too little and too much care for self and others. Professionalism needs to be viewed as a bi-directional relational exchange, with society demonstrating solidarity with those providing care. Additionally, given the scale of health disparities, simply stating that HCP need to work towards social justice oversimplifies the problem. Professionalism needs to encompass incorporating critical action and critical pedagogy into health care training and the health care profession to demonstrate solidarity with those impacted by racism.

On Time and Tea Bags: Chronos, Kairos, and Teaching for Humanistic Practice.

In these days of overwhelming clinical work, decreased resources, and increased educational demands, time has become a priceless commodity. Competency-based medical education attempts to address this challenge by increasing educational efficiency and decreasing the "steeping" of learners in clinical activities for set durations of time. However, in this environment, how does one teach for compassionate, humanistic practice? The answer arguably lies in clinician-teachers' recognition and engagement in a different type of time, that of kairos. Ancient Greek thought held that there were 2 interrelated types of time: chronological, linear, quantitative time-chronos-and qualitative, opportune time-kairos. Unlike chronos, kairos involves a sense of the "right time," the "critical moment," the proportionate amount. Developing a sense of kairos involves learning to apply general principles to unique situations lacking certainty and acting proportionally to need and context. Educationally, it implies intervening at the critical moment-the moment in which a thoughtful question, comment, or personal expression of perplexity, awe, or wonder can trigger reflection, dialogue, and an opening up of perspectives on the human dimensions of illness and medical care. A sensibility to kairos involves an awareness of what makes a moment "teachable," an understanding of chance, opportunity, and potential for transformation. Above all, inviting kairos means grasping an opportunity to immerse oneself and one's learners-even momentarily-into an exploration of patients and their stories, perspectives, challenges, and lives.

A Matter of Trust.

Trust is a fundamental tenet of the patient-physician relationship and is central to providing person-centered care. Because trust is profoundly relational and social, building trust requires navigation around issues of power, perceptions of competence, and the pervasive influence of unconscious bias-processes that are inherently complex and challenging for learners, even under the best of circumstances. The authors examine several of these challenges related to building trust in the patient-physician relationship. They also explore trust in the student-teacher relationship. In an era of competency-based medical education, a learner has the additional duty to be perceived as "entrustable" to 2 parties: the patient and the preceptor. Dialogue, a relational form of communication, can provide a framework for the development of trust. By engaging people as individuals in understanding each other's perspectives, values, and goals, dialogue ultimately strengthens the patient-physician relationship. In promoting a sense of agency in the learner, dialogue also strengthens the student-teacher relationship by fostering trust in oneself through development of a voice of one's own.

A Dialogic Approach to Teaching Person-Centered Care in Graduate Medical Education.

BACKGROUND: Training future physicians to provide compassionate, equitable, person-centered care remains a challenge for medical educators. Dialogues offer an opportunity to extend person-centered education into clinical care. In contrast to discussions, dialogues encourage the sharing of authority, expertise, and perspectives to promote new ways of understanding oneself and the world. The best methods for implementing dialogic teaching in graduate medical education have not been identified. OBJECTIVE: We developed and implemented a co-constructed faculty development program to promote dialogic teaching and learning in graduate medical education. METHODS: Beginning in April 2017, we co-constructed, with a pilot working group (PWG) of physician teachers, ways to prepare for and implement dialogic teaching in clinical settings. We kept detailed implementation notes and interviewed PWG members. Data were iteratively co-analyzed using a qualitative description approach within a constructivist paradigm. Ongoing analysis informed iterative changes to the faculty development program and dialogic education model. Patient and learner advisers provided practical guidance. RESULTS: The concepts and practice of dialogic teaching resonated with PWG members. However, they indicated that dialogic teaching was easier to learn about than to implement, citing insufficient time, lack of space, and other structural issues as barriers. Patient and learner advisers provided insights that deepened design, implementation, and eventual evaluation of the education model by sharing experiences related to person-centered care. CONCLUSIONS: While PWG members found that the faculty development program supported the implementation of dialogic teaching, successfully enabling this approach requires expertise, willingness, and support to teach knowledge and skills not traditionally included in medical curricula.

Persistent influence of a narrative educational program on physician attitudes regarding patient care.

PURPOSE: Educational approaches involving patient stories aim at enhancing empathy and patient-centered care; however, it is not known whether the influence of such programs on physician attitudes persists beyond medical school. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Family Centered Experience (FCE) paired preclinical medical students with patient families over two years and engaged students in reflective dialogs about the volunteers' stories. This study examined possible long-term influences on attitudes toward medicine and doctoring. Interviews were conducted with former students at the end of or after post-graduate training. All had completed the FCE between 4 and 10 years before the study. Thematic analysis was informed by a constructivist Grounded Theory approach. RESULTS: Several themes were identified. The FCE made graduates aware of the patients' perspectives and impacted their clinical practice in specific ways, such as developing collaborative partnerships, conducting family meetings, and breaking bad news. The course had influenced career choices and interest in teaching. Finally, the FCE enhanced appreciation of the human dimensions of medicine, which graduates had drawn upon in subsequent years. CONCLUSIONS: A program based on longitudinal interactions with individuals with chronic illness can have persistent influence by stimulating reflection on the patient's perspective and humanistic approaches to patient care.

Patient involvement in health professionals' education: a meta-narrative review.

More than 100 years ago, Osler inspired educators to consider health professions education (HPE) as intricately reliant on patients. Since that time, patient involvement in HPE has taken on many different meanings. The result is a disparate body of literature that is challenging to search, making it difficult to determine how to continue to build knowledge in the field. To address this problem, we conducted a review of the literature on patient involvement in HPE using a meta-narrative approach. The aim of the review was to synthesize how questions of patient involvement in HPE have been considered across various research traditions and over time. In this paper, we focus on three scholarly communities concerned with various interpretations of patient involvement in HPE-patient as teachers, real patients as standardized patients, and bedside learning. Focus on these three research communities served as a way to draw out various meta-narratives in which patients are thought of in particular ways, specific rationales for involvement are offered, and different research traditions are put to use in the field. Attending to the intersections between these meta-narratives, we focus on the potentially incommensurate ways in which "active" patient engagement is considered within the broader field and the possible implications. We end by reflecting on these tensions and what they might mean for the future of patient involvement, specifically patient involvement as part of future iterations of competency based education.

Dialogues on the Threshold: Dialogical Learning for Humanism and Justice.

Given the constant pressures of overflowing clinics, hospital wards, and emergency departments; shortened duty hours; and increased accreditation requirements, overburdened clinician teachers ask, "How does one teach for humanism and justice?" How does one step away-even momentarily-and focus teaching on the individual in front of us, the person who requires our attention and care? This approach must not only involve content (the patient's perspective of illness, social context, and life story) but also must be tightly linked with the ways in which these lessons in living are learned and taught. In this article, the authors propose recognition and use of a style of communication that is already implicitly present in clinical conversations and that is uniquely capable of stimulating reflection on the human dimensions of medicine: that of dialogue.Dialogue involves committing one's whole self to communicative exchange and emphasizes interpersonal relationships and trust. Its result is often not a specific answer; rather, it is enhanced understanding through the generation of new questions and possibilities and action in implementing solutions. It requires a reorientation of the teacher-learner relationship from top-down to one of open exchange and shared authority and responsibility. In the context of professional identity development, these conversations become dialogues on the threshold of transformative change. Through an exploration of dialogical teaching, the authors envision clinical education as constantly stepping in and out of goal-oriented discussions and reflective dialogues, all with the overall goal to educate physicians who practice with excellence, compassion, and justice.

Teaching the Social Determinants of Health: A Path to Equity or a Road to Nowhere?

Medical schools are increasingly called to include social responsibility in their mandates. As such, they are focusing their attention on the social determinants of health (SDOH) as key drivers in the health of the patients and communities they serve. However, underlying this emphasis on the SDOH is the assumption that teaching medical students about the SDOH will lead future physicians to take action to help achieve health equity. There is little evidence to support this belief. In many ways, the current approach to the SDOH within medical education positions them as "facts to be known" rather than as "conditions to be challenged and changed." Educators talk about poverty but not oppression, race but not racism, sex but not sexism, and homosexuality but not homophobia. The current approach to the SDOH may constrain or even incapacitate the ability of medical education to achieve the very goals it lauds, and in fact perpetuate inequity. In this article, the authors explore how "critical consciousness" and a recentering of the SDOH around justice and inequity can be used to deepen collective understanding of power, privilege, and the inequities embedded in social relationships in order to foster an active commitment to social justice among medical trainees. Rather than calling for minor curricular modifications, the authors argue that major structural and cultural transformations within medical education need to occur to make educational institutions truly socially responsible.

Dilemmas of Representation: Patient Engagement in Health Professions Education.

The role of the patient in bedside teaching has long been a matter of consideration in health professions education. Recent iterations of patient engagement include patients as storytellers, members of curriculum planning committees, guest lecturers, and health mentors. While these forms of patient engagement are reported to have many benefits for learners, educators, and the patients themselves, there is concern that such programs may not be representative of the diversity of patients that health care professionals will encounter throughout their careers. This problem of representation has vexed not only educators but also sociologists and political scientists studying patients' and the public's involvement in arenas such as health services research, policy, and organizational design.In this Perspective, the authors build on these sociological and political science approaches to expand our understanding of the problem of representation in patient engage-ment. In doing so, the authors' reconfiguration of the problem sheds new light on the dilemma of representation. They argue for an understanding of representation that not only is inclusive of who is being represented but that also takes seriously what is being represented, how, and why. This argument has implications for educators, learners, administrators, and patient participants.