Objectives: Goal setting and motivational interviewing (MI) may increase well-being by promoting healthy behavior. Since we failed to show improved well-being in a proactive assessment service for community-dwelling older adults applying these techniques, we studied whether implementation processes could explain this. Methods: Goals set during the comprehensive geriatric assessment were evaluated on their potential for behavior change. MI and goal setting adherence wasassessed by reviewing audiotaped interactions and interviewing care professionals. Results: Among the 280 goals set with 230 frail older adults (mean age 77 ± 6.9 years, 59% women), more than 90% had a low potential for behavior change. Quality thresholds for MI were reached in only one of the 11 interactions. Application was hindered by the context and the limited proficiency of care professionals. Discussion: Implementation was suboptimal for goal setting and MI. This decreased the potential for improved well-being in the participating older adults.
MULTIFILE
Background: Urban slums are characterised by unique challenging living conditions, which increase their inhabitants’ vulnerability to specific health conditions. The identification and prioritization of the key health issues occurring in these settings is essential for the development of programmes that aim to enhance the health of local slum communities effectively. As such, the present study sought to identify and prioritise the key health issues occurring in urban slums, with a focus on the perceptions of health professionals and community workers, in the rapidly growing city of Bangalore, India. Methods: The study followed a two-phased mixed methods design. During Phase I of the study, a total of 60 health conditions belonging to four major categories: - 1) non-communicable diseases; 2) infectious diseases; 3) maternal and women’s reproductive health; and 4) child health - were identified through a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews conducted with health professionals and other relevant stakeholders with experience working with urban slum communities in Bangalore. In Phase II, the health issues were prioritised based on four criteria through a consensus workshop conducted in Bangalore. Results: The top health issues prioritized during the workshop were: diabetes and hypertension (non-communicable diseases category), dengue fever (infectious diseases category), malnutrition and anaemia (child health, and maternal and women’s reproductive health categories). Diarrhoea was also selected as a top priority in children. These health issues were in line with national and international reports that listed them as top causes of mortality and major contributors to the burden of diseases in India. Conclusions: The results of this study will be used to inform the development of technologies and the design of interventions to improve the health outcomes of local communities. Identification of priority health issues in the slums of other regions of India, and in other low and lower middle-income countries, is recommended.
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.
