Daniel Kadden, Madeline Weber, Lori Herbst, Danielle E Weber
{"title":"言语的影响力:多源反馈让学生更深入地理解和思考护理目标讨论。","authors":"Daniel Kadden, Madeline Weber, Lori Herbst, Danielle E Weber","doi":"10.1177/10499091231175907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Physician communication during goals of care (GOC) discussions impact experiences for patients and families at end-of-life (EOL). Simulation allows training in a safe environment where feedback from simulated patients (SP), clinicians, and self-reflection can be incorporated. <b>Objectives:</b> To determine if multisource feedback from SP scenarios enriches feedback provided to trainees. <b>Design:</b> Fourth-medical students participated in two SP GOC discussions during an advanced care planning (ACP) curriculum. Students received feedback from SPs and faculty and completed a video review with self-reflection. <b>Setting and Subjects:</b> Forty-seven fourth-year medical students at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine participated in the curriculum from 2019-2021. <b>Measurements:</b> An inductive thematic analysis of the narrative data was performed examining all sources of feedback from the SP sessions. <b>Results:</b> Six themes emerged from the feedback: the warning shot: words to say and why it helps; acknowledging emotion: verbal vs non-verbal responses; organization: necessity of a clear path; body language: adding to and distracting from the conversation; terminology to avoid: what jargon encompasses and how it impacts patients; and silence: perceived importance by everyone. SP feedback focused on the personal emotional impact of a student's word choice and body language. Faculty feedback focused on specific learning points through examples from the conversation and expanded to hypothetical scenarios. Student self-reflection after video review allowed students to see challenges that they did not notice while immersed in the encounter. <b>Conclusion:</b> Multisource feedback from simulated GOC discussions provides unique insights for students to guide their development in leading difficult conversations.</p>","PeriodicalId":50810,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"173-178"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Words: Multisource Feedback Provides Students With a Deeper Understanding and Reflection on Goals of Care Discussions.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Kadden, Madeline Weber, Lori Herbst, Danielle E Weber\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10499091231175907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Physician communication during goals of care (GOC) discussions impact experiences for patients and families at end-of-life (EOL). Simulation allows training in a safe environment where feedback from simulated patients (SP), clinicians, and self-reflection can be incorporated. <b>Objectives:</b> To determine if multisource feedback from SP scenarios enriches feedback provided to trainees. <b>Design:</b> Fourth-medical students participated in two SP GOC discussions during an advanced care planning (ACP) curriculum. Students received feedback from SPs and faculty and completed a video review with self-reflection. <b>Setting and Subjects:</b> Forty-seven fourth-year medical students at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine participated in the curriculum from 2019-2021. <b>Measurements:</b> An inductive thematic analysis of the narrative data was performed examining all sources of feedback from the SP sessions. <b>Results:</b> Six themes emerged from the feedback: the warning shot: words to say and why it helps; acknowledging emotion: verbal vs non-verbal responses; organization: necessity of a clear path; body language: adding to and distracting from the conversation; terminology to avoid: what jargon encompasses and how it impacts patients; and silence: perceived importance by everyone. SP feedback focused on the personal emotional impact of a student's word choice and body language. Faculty feedback focused on specific learning points through examples from the conversation and expanded to hypothetical scenarios. Student self-reflection after video review allowed students to see challenges that they did not notice while immersed in the encounter. <b>Conclusion:</b> Multisource feedback from simulated GOC discussions provides unique insights for students to guide their development in leading difficult conversations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"173-178\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231175907\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231175907","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Impact of Words: Multisource Feedback Provides Students With a Deeper Understanding and Reflection on Goals of Care Discussions.
Background: Physician communication during goals of care (GOC) discussions impact experiences for patients and families at end-of-life (EOL). Simulation allows training in a safe environment where feedback from simulated patients (SP), clinicians, and self-reflection can be incorporated. Objectives: To determine if multisource feedback from SP scenarios enriches feedback provided to trainees. Design: Fourth-medical students participated in two SP GOC discussions during an advanced care planning (ACP) curriculum. Students received feedback from SPs and faculty and completed a video review with self-reflection. Setting and Subjects: Forty-seven fourth-year medical students at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine participated in the curriculum from 2019-2021. Measurements: An inductive thematic analysis of the narrative data was performed examining all sources of feedback from the SP sessions. Results: Six themes emerged from the feedback: the warning shot: words to say and why it helps; acknowledging emotion: verbal vs non-verbal responses; organization: necessity of a clear path; body language: adding to and distracting from the conversation; terminology to avoid: what jargon encompasses and how it impacts patients; and silence: perceived importance by everyone. SP feedback focused on the personal emotional impact of a student's word choice and body language. Faculty feedback focused on specific learning points through examples from the conversation and expanded to hypothetical scenarios. Student self-reflection after video review allowed students to see challenges that they did not notice while immersed in the encounter. Conclusion: Multisource feedback from simulated GOC discussions provides unique insights for students to guide their development in leading difficult conversations.
期刊介绍:
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine (AJHPM) is a peer-reviewed journal, published eight times a year. In 30 years of publication, AJHPM has highlighted the interdisciplinary team approach to hospice and palliative medicine as related to the care of the patient and family. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).