Valerie J. Lang

A collaborative model for developing and maintaining virtual patients for medical education

There is great interest in using computer-assisted instruction in medical education, but getting computer-assisted instruction materials used broadly is difficult to achieve. We describe a successful model for the development and maintenance of a specific type of computer-assisted instruction – virtual patients – in medical education. The collaborative models seven key components are described and compared to other models of diffusion of innovation and curriculum development. The collaborative development model that began in one medical discipline is now extended to two additional disciplines, through partnerships with their respective clerkship director organizations. We believe that the ability to achieve broad use of virtual patients, and to transition the programs from successfully relying on grant funding to financially self-sustaining, resulted directly from the collaborative development and maintenance process. This process can be used in other learning environments and for the development of other types of computer-assisted instruction programs.

Association Between Hand-off Patients and Subject Exam Performance in Medicine Clerkship Students

ABSTRACTBACKGROUNDTeaching hospitals increasingly rely on transfers of patient care to another physician (hand-offs) to comply with duty hour restrictions. Little is known about the impact of hand-offs on medical students.OBJECTIVETo evaluate the impact of hand-offs on the types of patients students see and the association with their subsequent Medicine Subject Exam performance.DESIGNObservational study over 1 year.PARTICIPANTSThird-year medical students in an Inpatient Medicine Clerkship at five hospitals with night float systems.MEASUREMENTSPrimary outcome: Medicine Subject Exam at the end of the clerkship; explanatory variables: number of fresh (without prior evaluation) and hand-off patients, diagnoses, subspecialty patients, and full evaluations performed during the clerkship, and United Stated Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step I scores.MAIN RESULTSOf the 2,288 patients followed by 89 students, 990 (43.3%) were hand-offs. In a linear regression model, the only variables significantly associated with students’ Subject Exam percentile rankings were USMLE Step I scores (B = 0.26, P < 0.001) and the number of full evaluations completed on fresh patients (B =0.20,  P = 0.048; model r2 = 0.58). In other words, for each additional fresh patient evaluated, Subject Exam percentile rankings increased 0.2 points. For students in the highest quartile of Subject Exam percentile rankings, only Step I scores showed a significant association (B = 0.22, P = 0.002; r2 = 0.5). For students in the lowest quartile, only fresh patient evaluations demonstrated a significant association (B = 0.27, P = 0.03; r2 = 0.34).CONCLUSIONSHand-offs constitute a substantial portion of students’ patients and may have less educational value than “fresh” patients, especially for lower performing students.

The evolving role of online virtual patients in internal medicine clerkship education nationally.

Purpose Despite the significant resources required to develop and maintain virtual patient (VP) programs, little is known about why this innovation has been adopted and how it is implemented. Understanding needs and implementation strategies is important for effective curriculum planning. Method In 2009 and 2011, surveys were offered to 110 U.S. internal medicine clerkship directors regarding their goals for adoption of Simulated Internal Medicine Patient Learning Experience VPs. In 2011, respondents were asked how they implemented VPs in their curricula. Results were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher exact test. Results Responses were obtained from 33 clerkship directors in 2009 and 45 in 2011. Comparing 2009 with 2011, improving students’ knowledge (29/33 [88%] versus 40/45 [91%]), differential diagnoses (27/33 [82%] versus 38/45 [86%]), and ability to identify key findings (26/33 [79%] versus 38/45 [86%]) remained somewhat or very important reasons for adopting VPs. Meeting Liaison Committee on Medical Education ED-2 (31/33 [94%] versus 33/45 [73%], P = .011) and ED-8 requirements (25/33 [76%] versus 25/45 [56%], P = .004) declined in importance. Eight of 38 (21%) replaced a learning activity with VPs, 9/38 (24%) integrated VPs into other learning activities, and 21/38 (55%) simply added VPs onto their curricula. Conclusions This large, multi-institutional study reports national trends in VP adoption and inte gration. Meeting cognitive learning objectives remained an important reason for adopting VPs, whereas meeting regulatory requirements decreased significantly in importance. Opportunities remain for m ore systematically integrating VPs into clerkship curricula. Clarifying the changing goals may help with this process.

Educating Clerkship Students in the Era of Resident Duty Hour Restrictions

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Department of Defense at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Universityof Nebraska - Lincoln.

Guidelines for Writing Department of Medicine Summary Letters

AAIM is the largest academically focused specialty organization representing departments of internal medicine at medical schools and teaching hospitals in the United States and Canada. As a consortium of five organizations, AAIM represents department chairs and chiefs; clerkship, residency, and fellowship program directors; division chiefs; and academic and business administrators as well as other faculty and staff in departments of internal medicine and their divisions.

The Effect of Resident Duty-Hours Restrictions on Internal Medicine Clerkship Experiences: Surveys of Medical Students and Clerkship Directors

Phenomenon: Medical students receive much of their inpatient teaching from residents who now experience restructured teaching services to accommodate the 2011 duty-hour regulations (DHR). The effect of DHR on medical student educational experiences is unknown. We examined medical students’ and clerkship directors’ perceptions of the effects of the 2011 DHR on internal medicine clerkship students’ experiences with teaching, feedback and evaluation, and patient care. Approach: Students at 14 institutions responded to surveys after their medicine clerkship or subinternship. Students who completed their clerkship (n = 839) and subinternship (n = 228) March to June 2011 (pre-DHR historical controls) were compared to clerkship students (n = 895) and subinterns (n = 377) completing these rotations March to June 2012 (post-DHR). Z tests for proportions correcting for multiple comparisons were performed to assess attitude changes. The Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine annual survey queried institutional members about the 2011 DHR just after implementation. Findings: Survey response rates were 64% and 50% for clerkship students and 60% and 48% for subinterns in 2011 and 2012 respectively, and 82% (99/121) for clerkship directors. Post-DHR, more clerkship students agreed that attendings (p =.011) and interns (p =.044) provided effective teaching. Clerkship students (p =.013) and subinterns (p =.001) believed patient care became more fragmented. The percentage of holdover patients clerkship students (p =.001) and subinterns (p =.012) admitted increased. Clerkship directors perceived negative effects of DHR for students on all survey items. Most disagreed that interns (63.1%), residents (67.8%), or attendings (71.1%) had more time to teach. Most disagreed that students received more feedback from interns (56.0%) or residents (58.2%). Fifty-nine percent felt that students participated in more patient handoffs. Insights: Students perceive few adverse consequences of the 2011 DHR on their internal medicine experiences, whereas their clerkship director educators have negative perceptions. Future research should explore the impact of fragmented patient care on the student–patient relationship and students’ clinical skills acquisition.

Collaborative development of teaching scripts: An efficient faculty development approach for a busy clinical teaching unit

BACKGROUND Exemplary teachers have been shown to use teaching scripts, ways of organizing the content and instructional approach for commonly encountered teachable moments. This study describes a busy hospitalist units early experience with the collaborative development of teaching scripts. METHODS In 2010, during monthly workshops, 10 faculty members each prepared and presented a teaching script for a different commonly encountered diagnosis. Open-ended surveys assessing the impact on faculty were analyzed using an iterative approach. Changes in faculty self-efficacy, and the frequency and applicability of teaching were measured. RESULTS The program required 10 hours of attendance time and a mean of 4.3 hours for each faculty member who prepared a teaching script. No significant differences in quantity or applicability of teaching were detected, but faculty self-efficacy improved significantly. In addition, faculty described beneficial effects in their individual professional development, development of a shared mental model of professional responsibility, and interpersonal relationships. A majority of comments were positive; negative comments focused on the time required to prepare scripts, and apprehension about presenting to peers. CONCLUSIONS The program was an efficient approach to improve self-rated teaching skills, enhance professional development, and build collegiality among clinician-teachers.

How we developed and piloted an electronic key features examination for the internal medicine clerkship based on a US national curriculum

Abstract Background: Key features examinations (KFEs) have been used to assess clinical decision making in medical education, yet there are no reports of an online KFE-based on a national curriculum for the internal medicine clerkship. What we did: The authors developed and pilot tested an electronic KFE based on the US Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine core curriculum. Teams, with expert oversight and peer review, developed key features (KFs) and cases. Evaluation: The exam was pilot tested at eight medical schools with 162 third and fourth year medical students, of whom 96 (59.3%) responded to a survey. While most students reported that the exam was more difficult than a multiple choice question exam, 61 (83.3%) students agreed that it reflected problems seen in clinical practice and 51 (69.9%) students reported that it more accurately assessed the ability to make clinical decisions. Conclusions: The development of an electronic KFs exam is a time-intensive process. A team approach offers built-in peer review and accountability. Students, although not familiar with this format in the US, recognized it as authentically assessing clinical decision-making for problems commonly seen in the clerkship.