探索儿科重症监护研究员可委托专业活动的跨专业发展:概念验证研究。

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Teaching and Learning in Medicine Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-18 DOI:10.1080/10401334.2023.2200760
Sabrina G van Keulen, Timo de Raad, Paulien Raymakers-Janssen, Olle Ten Cate, Marije P Hennus
{"title":"探索儿科重症监护研究员可委托专业活动的跨专业发展:概念验证研究。","authors":"Sabrina G van Keulen, Timo de Raad, Paulien Raymakers-Janssen, Olle Ten Cate, Marije P Hennus","doi":"10.1080/10401334.2023.2200760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Phenomenon</i></b>: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) delineate major professional activities that an individual in a given specialty must be \"entrusted\" to perform, ultimately without supervision, to provide quality patient care. Until now, most EPA frameworks have been developed by professionals within the same specialty. As safe, effective, and sustainable health care ultimately depends on interprofessional collaboration, we hypothesized that members of interprofessional teams might have clear and possibly additional insight into which activities are essential to the professional work of a medical specialist. <b><i>Approach</i></b>: We recently employed a national modified Delphi study to develop and validate a set of EPAs for Dutch pediatric intensive care fellows. In this proof-of-concept study, we explored what pediatric intensive care physicians' non-physician team members (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses) constitute as essential professional activities for PICU physicians and how they regarded the newly developed set of nine EPAs. We compared their judgments with the PICU physicians' opinions. <b><i>Findings</i></b>: This study shows that non-physician team members share a mental model with physicians about which EPAs are indispensable for pediatric intensive care physicians. Despite this agreement however, descriptions of EPAs are not always clear for non-physician team members who have to work with them on a daily basis. <b><i>Insights</i></b>: Ambiguity as to what an EPA entails when qualifying a trainee can have implications for patient safety and trainees themselves. Input from non-physician team members may add to the clarity of EPA descriptions. This finding supports the involvement of non-physician team members in the developmental process of EPAs for (sub)specialty training programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":51183,"journal":{"name":"Teaching and Learning in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"154-162"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring Interprofessional Development of Entrustable Professional Activities For Pediatric Intensive Care Fellows: A Proof-of-Concept Study.\",\"authors\":\"Sabrina G van Keulen, Timo de Raad, Paulien Raymakers-Janssen, Olle Ten Cate, Marije P Hennus\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10401334.2023.2200760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Phenomenon</i></b>: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) delineate major professional activities that an individual in a given specialty must be \\\"entrusted\\\" to perform, ultimately without supervision, to provide quality patient care. Until now, most EPA frameworks have been developed by professionals within the same specialty. As safe, effective, and sustainable health care ultimately depends on interprofessional collaboration, we hypothesized that members of interprofessional teams might have clear and possibly additional insight into which activities are essential to the professional work of a medical specialist. <b><i>Approach</i></b>: We recently employed a national modified Delphi study to develop and validate a set of EPAs for Dutch pediatric intensive care fellows. In this proof-of-concept study, we explored what pediatric intensive care physicians' non-physician team members (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses) constitute as essential professional activities for PICU physicians and how they regarded the newly developed set of nine EPAs. We compared their judgments with the PICU physicians' opinions. <b><i>Findings</i></b>: This study shows that non-physician team members share a mental model with physicians about which EPAs are indispensable for pediatric intensive care physicians. Despite this agreement however, descriptions of EPAs are not always clear for non-physician team members who have to work with them on a daily basis. <b><i>Insights</i></b>: Ambiguity as to what an EPA entails when qualifying a trainee can have implications for patient safety and trainees themselves. Input from non-physician team members may add to the clarity of EPA descriptions. This finding supports the involvement of non-physician team members in the developmental process of EPAs for (sub)specialty training programs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51183,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Teaching and Learning in Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"154-162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Teaching and Learning in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2023.2200760\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching and Learning in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2023.2200760","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现象:可委托专业活动(EPAs)界定了特定专业中个人必须 "受托 "执行的主要专业活动,最终无需监督,即可提供优质的病人护理服务。迄今为止,大多数 EPA 框架都是由同一专业的专业人员制定的。由于安全、有效和可持续的医疗保健最终依赖于跨专业合作,我们假设跨专业团队的成员可能会对哪些活动对医学专家的专业工作至关重要有更清晰、更深入的认识。方法:我们最近采用了一项全国性的改良德尔菲研究,为荷兰儿科重症监护研究员制定并验证了一套 EPA。在这项概念验证研究中,我们探讨了儿科重症监护医师的非医师团队成员(医师助理、执业护士和护士)将哪些活动视为 PICU 医师的基本专业活动,以及他们如何看待新开发的九项 EPA。我们将他们的判断与 PICU 医生的意见进行了比较。研究结果:这项研究表明,对于哪些 EPA 是儿科重症监护医生不可或缺的活动,非医生团队成员与医生有着共同的思维模式。尽管存在这种共识,但对于每天都要与 EPA 打交道的非医师团队成员来说,EPA 的描述并不总是很清晰。见解:在对受训者进行资格审查时,对 EPA 内容的含糊不清可能会对患者安全和受训者本身造成影响。非医师团队成员的意见可能会使 EPA 的描述更加清晰。这一发现支持非医师团队成员参与(亚)专科培训项目 EPA 的制定过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring Interprofessional Development of Entrustable Professional Activities For Pediatric Intensive Care Fellows: A Proof-of-Concept Study.

Phenomenon: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) delineate major professional activities that an individual in a given specialty must be "entrusted" to perform, ultimately without supervision, to provide quality patient care. Until now, most EPA frameworks have been developed by professionals within the same specialty. As safe, effective, and sustainable health care ultimately depends on interprofessional collaboration, we hypothesized that members of interprofessional teams might have clear and possibly additional insight into which activities are essential to the professional work of a medical specialist. Approach: We recently employed a national modified Delphi study to develop and validate a set of EPAs for Dutch pediatric intensive care fellows. In this proof-of-concept study, we explored what pediatric intensive care physicians' non-physician team members (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses) constitute as essential professional activities for PICU physicians and how they regarded the newly developed set of nine EPAs. We compared their judgments with the PICU physicians' opinions. Findings: This study shows that non-physician team members share a mental model with physicians about which EPAs are indispensable for pediatric intensive care physicians. Despite this agreement however, descriptions of EPAs are not always clear for non-physician team members who have to work with them on a daily basis. Insights: Ambiguity as to what an EPA entails when qualifying a trainee can have implications for patient safety and trainees themselves. Input from non-physician team members may add to the clarity of EPA descriptions. This finding supports the involvement of non-physician team members in the developmental process of EPAs for (sub)specialty training programs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Teaching and Learning in Medicine
Teaching and Learning in Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
12.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Teaching and Learning in Medicine ( TLM) is an international, forum for scholarship on teaching and learning in the health professions. Its international scope reflects the common challenge faced by all medical educators: fostering the development of capable, well-rounded, and continuous learners prepared to practice in a complex, high-stakes, and ever-changing clinical environment. TLM''s contributors and readership comprise behavioral scientists and health care practitioners, signaling the value of integrating diverse perspectives into a comprehensive understanding of learning and performance. The journal seeks to provide the theoretical foundations and practical analysis needed for effective educational decision making in such areas as admissions, instructional design and delivery, performance assessment, remediation, technology-assisted instruction, diversity management, and faculty development, among others. TLM''s scope includes all levels of medical education, from premedical to postgraduate and continuing medical education, with articles published in the following categories:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信