Patients’ Engagement in Medical Education

Abstract

Patient engagement in medical education for health care professionals is fundamental [1]. Patients are effective and successful in teaching skills to medical and nursing students with positive outcomes on students and patients [2]. Patients diagnosed with chronic illnesses can be considered as Bexpert patients^ who can bring in their experience of illness and teach the emotional, psychological, social, and economic aspects of illness [2]. Traditionally, patients have been actively involved in teaching and/or assessment which is often achieved by a trained patient-educator with the goal of bringing patient voices into the education about illness and its impact on patient lifestyle and personal and psychological well-being alongside socioeconomic status [2]. However, engaging patients in the planning process of medical curriculum requires stronger partnerships between patients and healthcare providers. Patients should be involved in the decision-making process of Continuing Professional Development activities at each step of their developments [3]. Unfortunately, there is sparse evidence about patients active involvement in medical curriculum development despite that patients’ engagement in the education of healthcare clinicians is associated with better patient care, treatment adherence, patient satisfaction, and positive health outcomes [4]. There are a few examples of patient involvement in successful curriculum planning and design. For example, Happell et al. study investigated patient engagement in the development of a nursing curriculum, wherein patients brought specific knowledge, skills, and qualities that they deemed favorable—for example, not victim blaming/labelling, avoiding professional narrowness, and acceptance of patients experiences [4]. The Alahlafi study used a modified Delphi technique to determine the content of a psoriasis teaching workshop wherein patients’ views were incorporated in the curriculum development [5]. Additionally, parents of children with chronic disease coproduced a course on teaching residents about family dynamics related to having a child with disease. Patients were involved in the course design, the facilitation of discussion on parent experiences with the healthcare system, and end-of-course debriefing sessions. Although the evaluation of the program was subjective, this course represented one of the few programs where patients or service users were involved right from the design stages (https://www.unmc.edu/mmi/ departments/devmedicine/devmed-training/project-docc.html). The Project Delivery of Chronic CARE program involved parents of children with chronic illnesses in designing the training for trainee pediatricians alongside teaching them appreciation of the issues involved in living with an ill child [2]. The program was innovative as it was developed by family members of chronically ill children versus health professionals. Patient involvement in curriculum planning of educational interventions in mental health has also been highly beneficial in the provision of mental health care [3]. The study by Ferguson indicated that to improve collaboration between mental health professionals and service users, such as patients and family members requires developing ongoing relationships with patients and their family members. Identifying strategies to involve families in the development of CME is crucial to imitating and maintaining family engagement [6]. It must be noted, however, that despite the potential in establishing partnership between patients and healthcare providers, resistance to patients engagement and collaboration from family members and clinicians persis t [7] . Furthermore, sometimes clinical and non-clinical educators were unsure of how to involve patients completely in course development and they were not persuaded that it was appropriate to do so. Furthermore, there have been reservations from educators on the added value that such involvement would have in increasing the educational experience [2]. In oncology, treatment has been changing rapidly and very often the usage of these new technologies does not provide sufficient evidence on long-term treatment-related side effect on patients. Thus, patients are a fundamental group to provide their feedback, and their needs should be addressed in more formal * Ewa Szumacher [email protected]