'First in family' experiences in a Canadian medical school: A critically reflexive study.

BACKGROUND: Medical students from affluent and highly educated backgrounds remain overrepresented in Canadian medical schools despite widespread efforts to improve diversity. Little is known of the medical school experiences of students who are first in their family (FiF) to attend university. Drawing on Bourdieu and a critically reflexive lens, this study explored the experiences of FiF students in a Canadian medical school to better understand the ways in which the medical school environment can be exclusive and inequitable to underrepresented students. METHODS: We interviewed 17 medical students who self-identified as being FiF to attend university. Utilising theoretical sampling, we also interviewed five students who identified as being from medical families to test our emerging theoretical framework. Participants were asked to discuss what 'first in family' meant to them, their journey into medical school and their experiences at medical school. Bourdieu's theories and concepts were used as sensitising concepts to explore the data. RESULTS: FiF students discussed the implicit messages they received about who belongs in medical school, challenges in shifting from their pre-medical lives to a medical identity and competing with peers for residency programmes. They reflected on the advantages they perceived they had over their fellow students due to their less 'typical' social backgrounds. CONCLUSION: While medical schools continue to make strides when it comes to increasing diversity, inclusivity and equity require increased attention. Our findings highlight the ongoing need for structural and cultural change at admissions and beyond-change that recognises the much-needed presence and perspectives that underrepresented medical students, including those who are FiF, bring to medical education and healthcare. Engaging in critical reflexivity represents a key way that medical schools can continue to address issues of equity, diversity and inclusion.

A qualitative assessment of perceptions and attitudes toward postoperative pain and opioid use in patients undergoing elective knee arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Orthopedic surgeons routinely prescribe opioids to manage post-operative pain. In the face of an opioid epidemic, a one-size-fits-all approach to pain management is no longer appropriate. Patient-centred prescribing practices should be used by surgeons; however, little is known about what influences patient attitudes toward postoperative pain and its management to inform such practices. We sought to explore patient attitudes toward postsurgical pain management, including opioids. METHODS: We conducted qualitative, semistructured interviews of 11 opioid-naive patients (age 16-46 yr) who were scheduled to undergo arthroscopic knee surgery. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using a framework analysis that involved familiarization, developing a thematic framework, indexing, charting and mapping, and interpretation. RESULTS: Participant attitudes toward postoperative pain and opioids were influenced by perceived tolerance to pain based on personal experience, perceived predisposition to addiction based on personal assumptions regarding addictive personality traits and risk factors, and perceptions of opioid use shaped by external influences, including family, friends and the media's depiction of the opioid epidemic. Every patient expressed that preoperative counselling and education regarding postoperative pain management would be beneficial in improving their knowledge base, easing anxieties and clarifying misunderstandings. CONCLUSION: Surgeons can address the patient-reported factors identified in this study to help optimize a patient's perioperative experience without relying solely on prescribed analgesia. By improving accessibility to education and promoting safe, patient-centred prescribing practices, we may reduce reliance on opioids in orthopedic surgery.

The KAIROS Blanket Exercise: Engaging Indigenous ways of knowing to foster critical consciousness in medical education.

PURPOSE: Indigenous Peoples across Turtle Island (North America) experience ongoing health disparities tied to the effects of colonization and persistent racism toward Indigenous Peoples. Educating future clinicians to develop a critical consciousness is an important way to work toward cultural safety and improve the health care experiences of Indigenous patients. The present study evaluated the ability of the KAIROS Blanket Exercise (KBE) to foster critical consciousness. METHODS: Two hundred thirteen medical students at the University of Toronto participated in the KBE. Subsequently, 174 students completed a paper evaluation, designed to capture concepts of cultural safety and critical consciousness. Data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods to identify shifts in perspectives. RESULTS: The majority of students reported the exercise altered the way they viewed those from backgrounds different from their own, and comments regarding bias, power and privilege were highlighted throughout the responses. Engaging in critical reflection through dialogue and revealing the complex sociopolitical context of Indigenous Peoples' history were emphasized as central to this transformation. CONCLUSIONS: Following participation in the KBE, medical students demonstrated a shift in their perspectives. This suggests that creating curricular space for critical pedagogy may be effective in fostering critical consciousness, ultimately encouraging reflexive practice and social action.

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.

The Hidden Curriculum of Compassionate Care: Can Assessment Drive Compassion?

PURPOSE: Medical schools are expected to promote compassionate care among learners. Assessment is a key way to communicate values to learners but can create a hidden curriculum. Assessing compassionate care is challenging; however, not assessing it can communicate to students that such care is not valued. The purpose of this study was to explore how current assessment strategies promote or suppress the idea that caring behaviors are valued learning objectives. METHOD: Data sources were third-year course documents; interviews of 9 faculty, conducted between December 2015 and February 2016; and focus groups with 13 third-year medical students and an interview with 1 third-year medical student, conducted between February and June 2016. The stated intentions of third-year assessments were compared with the behaviors rewarded through the assessment process and the messages students received about what is valued in medical school. RESULTS: Syllabi did not include caring as a learning outcome. Participants recognized assessment as a key influence on student focus. Faculty perspectives varied on the role of medical schools in assessing students' caring and compassion. Students prioritized studying for assessments but described learning about caring and compassion from interactions such as meaningful patient encounters and both positive and negative role models that were not captured in assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Faculty members expressed concern about not assessing caring and compassion but acknowledged the difficulty in doing so. While students admitted that assessments influenced their studying, their reported experiences revealed that the idea that "assessment drives learning" did not capture the complexity of their learning.

The Divergence and Convergence of Critical Reflection and Critical Reflexivity: Implications for Health Professions Education.

As a field, health professions education (HPE) has begun to answer calls to draw on social sciences and humanities (SS&H) knowledge and approaches for curricular content, design, and pedagogy. Two commonly used SS&H concepts in HPE are critical reflection and critical reflexivity. But these are often conflated, misunderstood, and misapplied. Improved clarity of these concepts may positively affect both the education and practice of health professionals. Thus, the authors seek to clarify the origins of each, identify the similarities and differences between them, and delineate the types of teaching and assessment methods that fit with critical reflection and/or critical reflexivity. Common to both concepts is an ultimate goal of social improvement. Key differences include the material emphasis of critical reflection and the discursive emphasis of critical reflexivity. These similarities and differences result in some different and some similar teaching and assessment approaches, which are highlighted through examples. The authors stress that all scientific and social scientific concepts and methods imported into HPE must be subject to continued scrutiny both from within their originating disciplines and in HPE. This continued questioning is core to the ongoing development of the HPE field and also to health professionals' thinking and practice.

Has the UK Clinical Aptitude Test improved medical student selection?

OBJECTIVES: In 2006, the United Kingdom Clinical Aptitude Test (UKCAT) was introduced as a new medical school admissions tool. The aim of this cohort study was to determine whether the UKCAT has made any improvements to the way medical students are selected. METHODS: Regression analysis was performed in order to study the ability of previous school type and gender to predict UKCAT, personal statement or interview scores in two cohorts of accepted students. The ability of admissions scores and demographic data to predict performance on knowledge and skills examinations was also studied. RESULTS: Previous school type was not a significant predictor of either interview or UKCAT scores amongst students who had been accepted onto the programme (n = 307). However, it was a significant predictor of personal statement score, with students from independent and grammar schools performing better than students from state-maintained schools. Previous school type, personal statements and interviews were not significant predictors of knowledge examination performance. UKCAT scores were significant predictors of knowledge examination performance for all but one examination administered in the first 2 years of medical school. Admissions data explained very little about performance on skills (objective structured clinical examinations [OSCEs]) assessments. CONCLUSIONS: The use of personal statements as a basis for selection results in a bias towards students from independent and grammar schools. However, no evidence was found to suggest that students accepted from these schools perform any better than students from maintained schools on Year 1 and 2 medical school examinations. Previous school type did not predict interview or UKCAT scores of accepted students. UKCAT scores are predictive of Year 1 and 2 examination performance at this medical school, whereas interview scores are not. The results of this study challenge claims made by other authors that aptitude tests do not have a place in medical school selection in the UK.