Implementation of a patient-teaching workshop to improve pharmacy students’ competencies in patient-centered communication: a case report
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The pharmacist-patient relationship has evolved over recent decades and the development of clinical pharmacy requires pharmacists to take patient-centered responsibilities. This requires a specific set of skills, such as patient-centered communication. Evaluation of students' competencies in patient-centered communication is challenging in academic settings and complementary assessment methods may be designed in order to overcome the limits of traditional preceptors' ratings or objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). There is increasing interest in a more active patient role in healthcare professional education and there are very few reports about patient-led education in pharmacies. Thus, the objective of this work was to implement a patient-teaching workshop and to assess its impact on pharmacy students' competencies in patient-centered communication. METHODS: The workshop was developed in collaboration between four patients, a senior clinical pharmacist and a lecturer in education sciences and implemented in the hospital pharmacy residency program. The main course objective was acquiring the three competencies of the Calgary-Cambridge guide to the medical interview: (i) building a relationship, (ii) conducting structured interview and (iii) gathering information. The learning process integrated: working on participants' perception of pharmacists-patient communication, a first simulated interview, didactic learning and a second simulated interview. After simulated interviews, patients and peer residents assessed learner's performance with a competency chart and provided individual feedback. Assessment methods included comparisons between the first and second interview scores and an anonymous post-course survey. RESULTS: Forty-seven residents and 19 patient teachers attended the session. Competency scores were higher after the second interview in all three competencies as rated by both patients (+ 25%) and peer residents (+ 29%). Residents expressed a high satisfaction and reported learning about conducting interviews and soft skills contributing to the development of a relationship with patients. "The involvement of patients" was expressed as most appreciated in the majority of the evaluation charts (87%) and the residents valued the importance of collaborative and interprofessional learning during the workshop. Three themes emerged: (1) patients' expertise, (2) reliability and (3) relationship, which underlined that the students estimated the patients were credible sources of information in this pedagogical context. CONCLUSION: This patient-teaching approach improved patient-centered competencies of pharmacy residents and promoted partnership between patients and pharmacy students.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».