{"title":"改变晨报的质量:弥合标准与现状之间的差距","authors":"Afsaneh Yakhforoshha, Fatemeh Samiee, Milad nasiri Savadkoohi","doi":"10.1111/jep.70258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim and Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The Morning Report (MR) has been considered an essential phase of clinical educational. Yet evidence points to the MR format varying in terms of content, presentation, goals, and organization in different academic departments. Therefore, we hypothesized that a standard-based tool for assessing MR followed by interactive meetings and workshops as empowerment programs results in bridging the gap between standards and the current state.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This quasi-experimental study was conducted during three stages in eight departments of academic hospitals of the Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (QUMS) in Iran. In the first stage, a possible gap of running MR were identified during an on-site assessment using a developed tool based on national standards. The tool focused on three areas running MR preparation, scheduling, and implementation. In the second stage, involved clinical educators were empowered to use the correct way of holding MR sessions. Finally, a reassessment was conducted 6 weeks afterward using the same tool, and the extent of changes in complying with the educational standards was measured. The data was analyzed using SPSS.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>After the intervention, a significant change was observed in the preparation and implementation dimension of MR in different departments (<i>p</i> < 0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the dimension of scheduling of quality of MR after intervention (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Conducting an initial assessment during actual workplace practices using a standard-based tool following interventions can promote translating new knowledge into real practice, bridge the educational gap, and achieve the desired practice.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Changing Quality of Morning Report: Bridging the Gap Between Standards and the Current Situation\",\"authors\":\"Afsaneh Yakhforoshha, Fatemeh Samiee, Milad nasiri Savadkoohi\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jep.70258\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim and Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>The Morning Report (MR) has been considered an essential phase of clinical educational. Yet evidence points to the MR format varying in terms of content, presentation, goals, and organization in different academic departments. Therefore, we hypothesized that a standard-based tool for assessing MR followed by interactive meetings and workshops as empowerment programs results in bridging the gap between standards and the current state.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This quasi-experimental study was conducted during three stages in eight departments of academic hospitals of the Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (QUMS) in Iran. In the first stage, a possible gap of running MR were identified during an on-site assessment using a developed tool based on national standards. The tool focused on three areas running MR preparation, scheduling, and implementation. In the second stage, involved clinical educators were empowered to use the correct way of holding MR sessions. Finally, a reassessment was conducted 6 weeks afterward using the same tool, and the extent of changes in complying with the educational standards was measured. The data was analyzed using SPSS.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>After the intervention, a significant change was observed in the preparation and implementation dimension of MR in different departments (<i>p</i> < 0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the dimension of scheduling of quality of MR after intervention (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Conducting an initial assessment during actual workplace practices using a standard-based tool following interventions can promote translating new knowledge into real practice, bridge the educational gap, and achieve the desired practice.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"volume\":\"31 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70258\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70258","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Changing Quality of Morning Report: Bridging the Gap Between Standards and the Current Situation
Aim and Objective
The Morning Report (MR) has been considered an essential phase of clinical educational. Yet evidence points to the MR format varying in terms of content, presentation, goals, and organization in different academic departments. Therefore, we hypothesized that a standard-based tool for assessing MR followed by interactive meetings and workshops as empowerment programs results in bridging the gap between standards and the current state.
Methods
This quasi-experimental study was conducted during three stages in eight departments of academic hospitals of the Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (QUMS) in Iran. In the first stage, a possible gap of running MR were identified during an on-site assessment using a developed tool based on national standards. The tool focused on three areas running MR preparation, scheduling, and implementation. In the second stage, involved clinical educators were empowered to use the correct way of holding MR sessions. Finally, a reassessment was conducted 6 weeks afterward using the same tool, and the extent of changes in complying with the educational standards was measured. The data was analyzed using SPSS.
Results
After the intervention, a significant change was observed in the preparation and implementation dimension of MR in different departments (p < 0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the dimension of scheduling of quality of MR after intervention (p > 0.05).
Conclusion
Conducting an initial assessment during actual workplace practices using a standard-based tool following interventions can promote translating new knowledge into real practice, bridge the educational gap, and achieve the desired practice.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.