Background: The aim of this study is to validate a newly developed nurses' self-efficacy sources inventory. We test the validity of a five-dimensional model of sources of self-efficacy, which we contrast with the traditional four-dimensional model based on Bandura's theoretical concepts. Methods: Confirmatory factor analysis was used in the development of the newly developed self-efficacy measure. Model fit was evaluated based upon commonly recommended goodness-of-fit indices, including the χ2 of the model fit, the Root Mean Square Error of approximation (RMSEA), the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). Results: All 22 items of the newly developed five-factor sources of self-efficacy have high factor loadings (range .40-.80). Structural equation modeling showed that a five-factor model is favoured over the four-factor model. Conclusions and implications: Results of this study show that differentiation of the vicarious experience source into a peer- and expert based source reflects better how nursing students develop self-efficacy beliefs. This has implications for clinical learning environments: a better and differentiated use of self-efficacy sources can stimulate the professional development of nursing students.
DOCUMENT
Empathy competence is considered a key aspect of excellent performancein communication professions. But we lack an overview of the specificknowledge, attitudes, and skills required to develop such competence inprofessional communication. Through interviews with 35 seasoned communication professionals, this article explores the role and nature ofempathy competence in professional interactions. The analysis resulted in aframework that details the skills, knowledge, and attitudinal aspects ofempathy; distinguishes five actions through which empathy manifests itself;and sketches relationships of empathy with several auxiliary factors. Theframework can be used for professional development, recruitment, and thedesign of communication education programs.
DOCUMENT
This study aims to map VE teachers’ perceived importance of assessment competence. The study was conducted in the Netherlands among teachers of professional studies in Universities of Applied Sciences. A large-scale study was conducted to represent a broad population of teachers, including various vocational fields, roles, and situations, allowing for the exploration of differences across these contextual variables.
LINK
Abstract Purpose The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effect of including the Dutch National Pharmacotherapy Assessment (DNPA) in the medical curriculum on the level and development of prescribing knowledge and skills of junior doctors. The secondary aim was to evaluate the relationship between the curriculum type and the prescribing competence of junior doctors. Methods We re-analysed the data of a longitudinal study conducted in 2016 involving recently graduated junior doctors from 11 medical schools across the Netherlands and Belgium. Participants completed three assessments during the first year after graduation (around graduation (+/−4 weeks), and 6 months, and 1 year after graduation), each of which contained 35 multiple choice questions (MCQs) assessing knowledge and three clinical case scenarios assessing skills. Only one medical school used the DNPA in its medical curriculum; the other medical schools used conventional means to assess prescribing knowledge and skills. Five medical schools were classified as providing solely theoretical clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) education; the others provided both theoretical and practical CPT education (mixed curriculum). Results Of the 1584 invited junior doctors, 556 (35.1%) participated, 326 (58.6%) completed the MCQs and 325 (58.5%) the clinical case scenarios in all three assessments. Junior doctors whose medical curriculum included the DNPA had higher knowledge scores than other junior doctors (76.7% [SD 12.5] vs. 67.8% [SD 12.6], 81.8% [SD 11.1] vs. 76.1% [SD 11.1], 77.0% [12.1] vs. 70.6% [SD 14.0], p<0.05 for all three assessments, respectively). There was no difference in skills scores at the moment of graduation (p=0.110), but after 6 and 12 months junior doctors whose medical curriculum included the DNPA had higher skills scores (both p<0.001). Junior doctors educated with a mixed curriculum had significantly higher scores for both knowledge and skills than did junior doctors educated with a theoretical curriculum (p<0.05 in all assessments). Conclusion Our findings suggest that the inclusion of the knowledge focused DNPA in the medical curriculum improves the prescribing knowledge, but not the skills, of junior doctors at the moment of graduation. However, after 6 and 12 months, both the knowledge and skills were higher in the junior doctors whose medical curriculum included the DNPA. A curriculum that provides both theoretical and practical education seems to improve both prescribing knowledge and skills relative to a solely theoretical curriculum.
MULTIFILE
Abstract Managing adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is a challenge, especially because most healthcare professionals are insufficiently trained for this task. Since context-based clinical pharmacovigilance training has proven effective, we assessed the feasibility and effect of a creating a team of Junior-Adverse Drug Event Managers (J-ADEMs). The J-ADEM team consisted of medical students (1st–6th year) tasked with managing and reporting ADRs in hospitalized patients. Feasibility was evaluated using questionnaires. Student competence in reporting ADRs was evaluated using a case-control design and questionnaires before and after J-ADEM program participation. From Augustus 2018 to Augustus 2019, 41 students participated in a J-ADEM team and screened 136 patients and submitted 65 ADRs reports to the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Center Lareb. Almost all patients (n = 61) found it important that “their” ADR was reported, and all (n = 62) patients felt they were taken seriously by the J-ADEM team. Although attending physicians agreed that the ADRs should have been reported, they did not do so themselves mainly because of a “lack of knowledge and attitudes” (50%) and “excuses made by healthcare professionals” (49%). J-ADEM team students were significantly more competent than control students in managing ADRs and correctly applying all steps for diagnosing ADRs (control group 38.5% vs. intervention group 83.3%, p < 0.001). The J-ADEM team is a feasible approach for detecting and managing ADRs in hospital. Patients were satisfied with the care provided, physicians were supported in their ADR reporting obligations, and students acquired relevant basic and clinical pharmacovigilance skills and knowledge, making it a win-win-win intervention.
MULTIFILE
Fully aware of the unusual timing of submitting a commentary 30 years later, we want to reflect on the June edition of the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (BJCP) (1993), which featured four research articles on education in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) written by our former professor, Theo de Vries, and an editorial highlighting the imperative to improve CPT education, specifically by paying more attention to rational drug prescribing for common diseases.1–5 This plea was illustrated by five cartoons (Figure 1) and formed the basis for the World Health Organization's (WHO) Guide to Good Prescribing and its 6-step. The first four cartoons portrayed the suboptimal state of CPT education as a metaphorical ‘Clinical Pharmacology Continent’ (CPC) and a ‘General Practitioners Island’ (GPI), with a large gap between them. While clinical pharmacologists investigated new drug therapies, general practitioners frequently found themselves unprepared when making rational treatment decisions.1 The final cartoon introduced a solution: problembased learning education, depicted as a bridge connecting the continent and the island. Over the past 30 years, considerable progress has been achieved in bridging the gap. Therefore, we intend to illustrate this transformation with a similar cartoon (Figure 2).
DOCUMENT
Background: Nurses play an important role in pharmaceutical care. They are involved in: detecting clinical change; communicating/discussing pharmacotherapy with patients, their advocates, and other healthcare professionals; proposing and implementing medication-related interventions; and ensuring follow-up of patients and medication regimens. To date, a framework of nurses' competences on knowledge, skills, and attitudes as to interprofessional pharmaceutical care tasks is missing. Objectives: To reach agreement with experts about nurses' competences for tasks in interprofessional pharmaceutical care. Methods: A two-phase study starting with a scoping review followed by five Delphi rounds was performed. Competences extracted from the literature were assessed by an expert panel on relevance by using the RAND/UCLA method. The experts (n = 22) involved were healthcare professionals, nurse researchers, and educators from 14 European countries with a specific interest in nurses' roles in interprofessional pharmaceutical care. Descriptive statistics supported the data analysis. Results: The expert panel reached consensus on the relevance of 60 competences for 22 nursing tasks. Forty-one competences were related to 15 generic nursing tasks and 33 competences were related to seven specific nursing tasks. Conclusions: This study resulted in a competence framework for competency-based nurse education. Future research should focus on imbedding these competences in nurse education. A structured instrument should be developed to assess students' readiness to achieve competence in interprofessional pharmaceutical care in clinical practice.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Given the complexity of teaching clinical reasoning to (future) healthcare professionals, the utilization of serious games has become popular for supporting clinical reasoning education. This scoping review outlines games designed to support teaching clinical reasoning in health professions education, with a specific emphasis on their alignment with the 8-step clinical reasoning cycle and the reflective practice framework, fundamental for effective learning. Methods: A scoping review using systematic searches across seven databases (PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase) was conducted. Game characteristics, technical requirements, and incorporation of clinical reasoning cycle steps were analyzed. Additional game information was obtained from the authors. Results: Nineteen unique games emerged, primarily simulation and escape room genres. Most games incorporated the following clinical reasoning steps: patient consideration (step 1), cue collection (step 2), intervention (step 6), and outcome evaluation (step 7). Processing information (step 3) and understanding the patient’s problem (step 4) were less prevalent, while goal setting (step 5) and reflection (step 8) were least integrated. Conclusion: All serious games reviewed show potential for improving clinical reasoning skills, but thoughtful alignment with learning objectives and contextual factors is vital. While this study aids health professions educators in understanding how games may support teaching of clinical reasoning, further research is needed to optimize their effective use in education. Notably, most games lack explicit incorporation of all clinical reasoning cycle steps, especially reflection, limiting its role in reflective practice. Hence, we recommend prioritizing a systematic clinical reasoning model with explicit reflective steps when using serious games for teaching clinical reasoning.
DOCUMENT
Objectives: The development of children’s motor competence (MC) from early to middle childhood can follow different courses. The purpose of this longitudinal study was to describe and quantify the prevalence of patterns of MC development from early to middle childhood and to identify undesirable patterns. Design: The study used a longitudinal design. Data were collected in three consecutive years, between February 2020 (T0) and May 2022 (T2). Methods: A total of 1128 typically developing Dutch children (50.2% male) between 4 and 6 years old at baseline (M = 5.35 ± 0.69 years) participated in this study. MC was measured with the Athletic Skills Track and converted into Motor Quotient (MQ) scores. To convert all individual MQ scores into meaningful patterns of MC development, changes in MQ categories were analyzed between the different timepoints. Results: A total of 11 different developmental patterns were found. When grouping the different patterns, five undesirable patterns were found with 18.2% of the children, showing an undesirable pattern of MC development between T0 and T2. The patterns of motor development of the other children showed a normal or fluctuating course. Conclusions: There is a lot of variation in MC in early and middle childhood. A substantial percentage of young children showed undesirable MC developmental patterns emphasizing the need for early and targeted interventions.
DOCUMENT
Background: Clinical reasoning skills are considered to be among the key competencies a physiotherapist should possess. Yet, we know little about how physiotherapy students actually learn these skills in the workplace. A better understanding will benefit physiotherapy education.Objectives: To explore how undergraduate physiotherapy students learn clinical reasoning skills during placements.Design: A qualitative research design using focus groups and semi-structured interviews.Setting: European School of Physiotherapy, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Participants: Twenty-two undergraduate physiotherapy students and eight clinical teachers participated in this study.Main outcome measures: Thematic analysis of focus groups and semi-structured interviews.Results: Three overarching factors appeared to influence the process of learning clinical reasoning skills: the learning environment, the clinical teacher and the student. Preclinical training failed to adequately prepare students for clinical practice, which expected them to integrate physiotherapeutic knowledge and skills into a cyclic reasoning process. Students’ basic knowledge and assessment structure therefore required further development during the placements. Clinical teachers expected a holistic, multifactorial problem-solving approach from their students. Both students and teachers considered feedback and reflection essential to clinical learning. Barriers to learning experienced by students included time constraints, limited patient exposure and patient communication.Conclusions: Undergraduate physiotherapy students develop clinical reasoning skills through comparison of and reflection on different reasoning approaches observed in professional therapists. Over time, students learn to synthesise these different approaches into their own individual approach. Physiotherapy programme developers should aim to include a wide variety of multidisciplinary settings and patient categories in their clinical placements.
DOCUMENT
