A Philosophical Discussion of the Support of Self-Regulated Learning in Medical Education: The Treasure Hunt Approach Versus the (Dutch) "Dropping" Approach.

Issue: Many current educational approaches are intended to cultivate learners' full (learning) potential by fostering self-regulated learning (SRL), as it is expected that those learners with a high degree of SRL learn more effectively than those with a low degree of SRL. However, these attempts to foster SRL are not always successful. Evidence: We considered complexities related to fostering self-regulated learning by use of an analogy. This analogy was based on two (Dutch) children's games: the treasure hunt (children can find a "treasure" by following directions, completing assignments and/or answering questions) and the dropping (pre-teens are dropped in the woods at nighttime with the assignment to find their way back home). We formulated four interrelated philosophical questions. These questions were not formulated with the intention to provide clear-cut answers, but were instead meant to evoke contemplation about the SRL concept. During this contemplation, the implications of definitional issues regarding SRL were discussed by use of the first question: What are the consequences of the difficulties to explicate what is (not) SRL? The second question (How does SRL relate to autonomy?) touched upon the intricate relationship between SRL and autonomy, by discussing the role of social interaction and varying degrees of instruction when fostering SRL. Next, a related topic was addressed by the third question: How much risk are we willing and able to take when fostering SRL? And finally, the importance of and possibilities to assess SRL were discussed by the fourth question (Should SRL be assessed?). Implications: From our contemplations it has become clear that approaches to foster SRL are often insufficiently aligned with the experience and needs of learners. Instead these approaches are commonly defined by contextual factors, such as misconceptions about SRL and lack of leeway for learners. Consequently, we have used principles that apply to both treasure hunts and droppings, to provide guidelines on how to align one's approach to foster SRL with the educational context and experience and needs of learners.

How does portfolio use affect self-regulated learning in clinical workplace learning: What works, for whom, and in what contexts?

INTRODUCTION: Portfolio use to support self-regulated learning (SRL) during clinical workplace learning is widespread, but much is still unknown regarding its effectiveness. This review aimed to gain insight in the extent to which portfolio use supports SRL and under what circumstances. METHODS: A realist review was conducted in two phases. First, stakeholder interviews and a scoping search were used to formulate a program theory that explains how portfolio use could support SRL. Second, an in-depth literature search was conducted. The included papers were coded to extract context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOs). These were synthesized to answer the research question. RESULTS: Sixteen papers were included (four fulfilled all qualitative rigor criteria). Two primary portfolio mechanisms were established: documenting as a moment of contemplation (learners analyze experiences while writing portfolio reports) and documentation as a reminder of past events (previous portfolio reports aid recall). These mechanisms may explain the positive relationship between portfolio use and self-assessment, reflection, and feedback. However, other SRL outcomes were only supported to a limited extent: formulation of learning objectives and plans, and monitoring. The partial support of the program theory can be explained by interference of contextual factors (e.g., system of assessment) and portfolio-related mechanisms (e.g., mentoring). DISCUSSION: Portfolio research is falling short both theoretically-in defining and conceptualizing SRL-and methodologically. Nevertheless, this review indicates that portfolio use has potential to support SRL. However, the working mechanisms of portfolio use are easily disrupted. These disruptions seem to relate to tensions between different portfolio purposes, which may undermine learners' motivation.

Spirometry expert support in family practice: a cluster-randomised trial.

AIM: To assess the impact of two modes of spirometry expert support on Family physicians' (FPs') diagnoses and planned management in patients with apparent respiratory disease. METHOD: A cluster-randomised trial was performed with family practices as the unit of randomisation. FPs from 44 family practices recorded their diagnosis and planned management before and after spirometry for 868 patients. Intervention consisted of spirometry interpretation support by either a chest physician or expert software. Both interventions were compared with usual care (i.e. no additional interpretation support). Change in FPs' diagnoses after spirometry served as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were referral rate, additional diagnostic tests, and disease management changes. Effects were expressed as percentages and Odds Ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Diagnoses changed after intervention in all groups: 47.8% (95% CI 41.8 to 53.9) for chest physician support; 45.0% (95% CI 39.5 to 50.6) for software support; and 53.3% (95% CI 47.2 to 59.4) for usual care. Differences in the proportions of changed diagnosis were not statistically significant: chest physician support versus usual care OR 0.79 (95%CI 0.49 to 1.30); software support versus usual care OR 0.72 (95% CI 0.45 - 1.15). There were no differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Neither chest physician spirometry support nor expert software spirometry support had a significant impact on FPs' diagnosis of respiratory conditions or management decisions. TRIAL NUMBER: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00131157?order=1.

House dust mite allergen avoidance and self-management in allergic patients with asthma: randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of bed covers that are impermeable to house dust mites has been disputed. AIM: The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the combination of 'house dust mite impermeable' covers and a self-management plan, based on peak flow values and symptoms, leads to reduced use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) than self-management alone. DESIGN OF STUDY: Prospective, randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Primary care in a south-eastern region of the Netherlands. METHOD: Asthma patients aged between 16 and 60 years with a house dust mite allergy requiring ICS were randomised to intervention and placebo groups. They were trained to use a self-management plan based on peak flow and symptoms. After a 3-month training period, the intervention commenced using house dust mite impermeable and placebo bed covers. The follow-up period was 2 years. Primary outcome was the use of ICS; secondary outcomes were peak expiratory flow parameters, asthma control, and symptoms. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-six patients started the intervention with house dust mite impermeable or placebo bed covers. After 1 and 2 years, significant differences in allergen exposure were found between the intervention and control groups (P<0.001). No significant difference between the intervention and control groups was found in the dose of ICS (P = 0.08), morning peak flow (P = 0.52), peak flow variability (P = 0.36), dyspnoea (P = 0.46), wheezing (P = 0.77), or coughing (P = 0.41). There was no difference in asthma control between the intervention and control groups. CONCLUSION: House dust mite impermeable bed covers combined with self-management do not lead to reduced use of ICS compared with self-management alone.

Relationship between house dust mite (HDM) allergen exposure level and inhaled corticosteroid dosage in HDM-sensitive asthma patients on a self management program.

AIM: To assess whether exposure to house dust mite (HDM) allergens hampers a tapering off of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dosage in HDM-sensitive asthma patients. METHODS: Asthma patients sensitised to HDM allergens and using ICS were selected from general practices for this observational study. Dust samples from bed mattresses were taken to assess exposure ('no', 'low', 'intermediate' or 'high') to HDM allergens with a semi-quantitative test (Acarex). Patients were trained to use a self management plan to adjust the dose of ICS according to symptoms and peak flow. The observation period was three months. RESULTS: Outcomes from 123 patients were analysed. Within the 'no' and 'low' HDM exposure groups the proportion of patients who increased the dosage of their ICS medication was significantly lower than the proportion who tapered off or remained on the same dose of ICS. The group with high exposure to HDM allergens had the highest proportion of patients who increased their dose of ICS (p = 0.055). CONCLUSIONS: High exposure to HDM allergens seems to coincide with the use of higher dose ICS treatment in asthma patients sensitised to HDM allergens.

Asthma education tailored to individual patient needs can optimise partnerships in asthma self-management.

This paper studies the effects of patient education, tailored to individual needs of patients as part of an asthma self-management program. A tailored education program was designed which took into account individual information needs of patients by using a feedback instrument. Totally 98 steroid dependent asthmatics entered the tailored education program, 95 patients received usual care. Outcome measures were information exchanged and patient satisfaction. Study duration was 6 months. Patients in the tailored education group showed a significant reduction in information need (P=0.005). Patient satisfaction increased from 87.9 to 93.7 in this group while this did not change in the usual care group (P=0.000). Use of this tailored education program improved the GP-patient interaction within the context of a clinically effective asthma self-management program. Findings from this study may be applicable to other chronic conditions as well.

Willingness of patients to perform self-management of asthma and the role of inhaled steroids.

OBJECTIVE: Asthma self-management is a generally accepted effective treatment strategy for asthma patients. Acceptance by patients may be a barrier for successful implementation. In this study, the role of inhaled steroids in starting asthma self-management is described. DESIGN: Cross-sectional explorative study. SETTING: General practice. SUBJECTS: 283 adult steroid-requiring asthma patients were invited by their GP to participate in a self-management programme. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In a multivariate logistic regression model, the relation between baseline dosage of inhaled steroids, occupational status, age and sex as independent variables and willingness to participate as dependent variables was explored. RESULTS: Of all invited, 148 (52%) were willing to participate. Subjects not using inhaled steroids were least willing to participate (43/143 = 30%). Subjects with low doses of inhaled steroids ( < 400 mcg daily) were most willing to participate (44/54 = 81%). Unemployed asthmatics had a higher tendency to participate than patients with a regular job. CONCLUSION: Acceptance of self-management by patients is not a limiting issue in promoting self-management of asthma in general practice. High acceptance in patients taking low or intermediate doses of inhaled steroids makes general practice the most appropriate setting for self-management. A selection procedure is recommended.