Interprofessional communication skills training to improve medical students' and nursing trainees' error communication - quasi-experimental pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional communication is of extraordinary importance for patient safety. To improve interprofessional communication, joint training of the different healthcare professions is required in order to achieve the goal of effective teamwork and interprofessional care. The aim of this pilot study was to develop and evaluate a joint training concept for nursing trainees and medical students in Germany to improve medication error communication. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods, quasi-experimental study with a pre-post design and two study arms. This study compares medical students (3rd year) and nursing trainees (2nd year) who received an interprofessional communication skills training with simulation persons (intervention group, IG) with a control group (CG). Both cohorts completed identical pre- and post-training surveys using the German Interprofessional Attitudes Scale (G-IPAS) and a self-developed interprofessional error communication scale. Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney-U-test and Wilcoxon-test were performed to explore changes in interprofessional error communication. RESULTS: A total of 154 were medical students, and 67 were nursing trainees (IG: 66 medical students, 28 nursing trainees / CG: 88 medical students, 39 nursing trainees). After training, there were significant improvements observed in the "interprofessional error communication" scale (p < .001) and the "teamwork, roles, and responsibilities" subscale (p = .012). Median scores of the subscale "patient-centeredness" were similar in both groups and remained unchanged after training (median = 4.0 in IG and CG). CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to find out whether the training sustainably improves interprofessional teamwork regarding error communication in acute care.

How shared is decision-making in multidisciplinary tumour conferences with patient participation? An observational study.

BACKGROUND: In some breast and gynaecologic cancer centres in Germany, patients participate in their own case discussion in multidisciplinary tumour conferences (MTCs), where treatment recommendations are discussed and finalized. However, the extent to which patients in MTCs are involved in decision-making on treatment recommendations remains largely unexplored. Hence, this study investigates how recommendations are communicated to patients and the extent to which the interactions with patients in MTCs are in line with shared decision-making (SDM). METHODS: In this observational study, we audio-recorded MTCs with patient participation in three breast and gynaecologic cancer centres in Germany. We qualitatively analysed the data with regard to content and linguistic aspects. RESULTS: We analysed 82 case discussions. Recommendations made during MTCs were regarding (i) treatment options, (ii) treatment initiation, (iii) next (treatment) steps and (iv) whether a treatment method should be initiated at all. The decision about recommendations depended in part on patients' preferences or further course/further outcomes. Although the purpose of MTCs is to provide recommendations, some recommendations were framed as the final decision. The majority of the decision-making conversation could be characterized as option talk (78%), during which patients were mostly proposed only one (treatment) option. CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes limited SDM in MTCs with patient participation. By indicating choices and thereby creating awareness of choices among patients, MTCs with patient participation could be used to foster SDM implementation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Two representatives of a large self-help organization for patients with breast cancer assisted the research project, particularly, in discussing the results.