Experience with the script concordance test to develop clinical reasoning skills in pharmacy students

Pharmacy students' perceptions of clinical reasoning development through a foundational thinking application framework

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Pharmacy students must learn to integrate the foundational and clinical sciences to make therapeutic decisions. There is a need for a developmental framework and scaffolding tools to bridge foundational knowledge with clinical reasoning among novice learners in pharmacy education. Our purpose is to describe the development and student perceptions of a framework designed to integrate foundational knowledge and clinical reasoning in second-year pharmacy students.

EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING

Using script theory as a conceptual model, a Foundational Thinking Application Framework (FTAF) was designed around a four-credit Pharmacotherapy of Nervous Systems Disorders course at the beginning of the second year of the doctor of pharmacy curriculum. The framework was implemented as two structured learning guides known as a unit plan and a pharmacologically based therapeutic evaluation. A total of 71 students in the course were asked to complete a 15-question online survey assessing perceptions towards specific components of the FTAF.

FINDINGS

Of 39 survey respondents, 37 (95%) described the unit plan as a useful organizer for the course. Thirty-five (80%) students agreed or strongly agreed that the unit plan helped organize instructional material for a given topic. Students (n = 32, 82%) preferred the pharmacologically based therapeutic evaluation format, with text comments highlighting that it provided good practice for clinical experiences and helped to organize critical thinking.

SUMMARY

Our study found that students had positive perceptions of FTAF's implementation within a pharmacotherapy course. Pharmacy education can benefit by adapting script-based strategies that have been successful in other health professions.

Development of a script concordance test to assess clinical reasoning in a pharmacy curriculum

INTRODUCTION

Clinical reasoning is a vital skill for student pharmacists in the provision of patient-centered care, but these skills are often difficult to assess in the didactic curriculum. A script concordance test (SCT) is an innovative assessment method that can be used to assess clinical reasoning skills. The objective of this study was to develop and refine an SCT to assess clinical reasoning skills of third year student pharmacists (P3s).

METHODS

An SCT was written and administered to P3s. Pharmacy practice faculty members served as the expert group. The SCT was scored and Rasch analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The SCT included 20 case vignettes and 60 questions. Test reliability was 0.34 with mean square values for all items between 0.7 and 1.3. Forty-two questions had a difficulty score between 0 and - 1 logits, indicating there were multiple questions with similar difficulty levels. Two case vignettes and 43.3% of questions (n = 26) were revised to enhance clarity and decrease ambiguity.

CONCLUSIONS

The SCT is a tool to assess clinical reasoning in the didactic curriculum. Faculty can create the SCT and use statistical methods such as Rasch analysis to assess validity and reliability of the SCT.

Capturing employer's perceptions of key variables in exceptional new practitioners' success by using a modified Delphi process

INTRODUCTION

The primary aim was to determine the key variables in a new practitioner's success from the perspective of pharmacy employers. A secondary aim was to describe the use of a modified Delphi process to collect quality information from external constituents.

METHODS

A historical review of the literature was conducted to ensure the inquiry extended existing thinking and to aid the development of questions. An asynchronous, online two-round modified Delphi process was used to gather input and develop consensus. The findings were verified by crosswalking with the Habits of Mind. Additionally, the strategies for inviting panelists, practitioner response rates, and the amount and quality of the data collected were examined.

RESULTS

The historical review yielded 25 articles that were categorized by disciplines studied, methods used, and characteristics found. Fourteen seasoned employers participated. Nine themes describing the behaviors and practices of exceptional new practitioners were identified. These themes were categorized into three groups: Change-Leader, Self-Manager, or Relationship-Builder. Additionally, all the themes mapped to multiple Habits of Mind. As a method for constituent input, the Delphi process yielded employer response rates per school ranging from 10% to 67% and produced five single-spaced pages of text (2124 words) for analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These descriptions of behaviors and practices of exceptional new practitioners build upon existing literature and provide additional guidance for professional development curricula. Additionally, an asynchronous, online Delphi panel can be a useful method to glean important insights from experienced pharmacy employers.

A classroom-based patient case activity as a potential formative indicator of pre-advanced pharmacy practice experience readiness

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Pharmacy programs must assess student readiness for advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs). This study evaluated: (1) if a relationship exists between student performance on a classroom-based patient case activity (Rx Review) and (2) performance on direct patient care and perceptions of the transferability of Rx Reviews to the APPE setting.

EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING

Rx Reviews are timed, independent, prospective reviews of a patient's medical record intended to simulate pre-rounding activities common in acute and ambulatory care settings. Students complete 12 Rx Reviews across a skills laboratory course sequence. Rx Review scores were compared to performance on acute care and ambulatory care APPEs for students in the Class of 2019 using descriptive statistics for student scores and bivariate logistic regression for the association between Rx Review scores and performance outcomes on patient care APPEs. Student perceptions of the Rx Reviews were assessed through a survey. Descriptive statistics and qualitative responses were used to analyze responses to the multiple-choice survey questions and open-ended question, respectively.

FINDINGS

One hundred twenty-two students participated in the study. A relationship was found between students' Rx Review scores and performance in certain direct patient care APPEs, with students performing in the bottom 50% on Rx Reviews being more likely to perform poorly on those APPEs. Over 93% of students identified Rx Reviews as at least somewhat helpful in preparing them for APPEs.

SUMMARY

This study indicated that a classroom-based patient case activity could be used as a formative measure of APPE readiness.

Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of Student Health Professionals in Placement and Simulation Settings: A Systematic Review

(1) Background: Clinical reasoning is essential to the effective practice of autonomous health professionals and is, therefore, an essential capability to develop as students. This review aimed to systematically identify the tools available to health professional educators to evaluate students' attainment of clinical reasoning capabilities in clinical placement and simulation settings. (2) Methods: A systemic review of seven databases was undertaken. Peer-reviewed, English-language publications reporting studies that developed or tested relevant tools were included. Searches included multiple terms related to clinical reasoning and health disciplines. Data regarding each tool's conceptual basis and evaluated constructs were systematically extracted and analysed. (3) Results: Most of the 61 included papers evaluated students in medical and nursing disciplines, and over half reported on the Script Concordance Test or Lasater Clinical Judgement Rubric. A number of conceptual frameworks were referenced, though many papers did not reference any framework. (4) Conclusions: Overall, key outcomes highlighted an emphasis on diagnostic reasoning, as opposed to management reasoning. Tools were predominantly aligned with individual health disciplines and with limited cross-referencing within the field. Future research into clinical reasoning evaluation tools should build on and refer to existing approaches and consider contributions across professional disciplinary divides.

Script concordance tests: A call for action in dental education

The Script Concordance Test (SCT) is an educational tool that aims to assess the ability to interpret medical information under conditions of uncertainty. It is widely used and validated in health education, but almost unknown in dentistry. Based on authentic clinical problem-solving situations, it allows to assess clinical reasoning that experienced health workers develop over the years. A specific scoring system, dedicated to SCT, considers the variability of responses of practitioners in the same clinical situations. Finally, the scores generated by SCT reflect the respondents' ability to interpret clinical data compared to experienced clinicians. This article aims to familiarise the dental educators' community with SCT construction, optimisation and its possible applications.

Use of a script concordance test to evaluate the impact of a targeted educational strategy on clinical reasoning in advanced pharmacy practice experiential students

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

It is unclear how clinical reasoning is impacted by a single advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) and how preceptors can further develop these skills.

EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING

Students completing an APPE within four sites were invited to participate. To assess clinical reasoning skills, students completed a 30 item script concordance test (SCT) during week 1 and week 5 of a rotation. Students were divided into control and intervention groups. The intervention group participated in a clinical reasoning discussion, during which students presented a case and led a discussion on how to reason through treatment options.

FINDINGS

Change in mean SCT scores between week 1 and week 5 were 0.84 (2.8%) and 1.23 (4.1%) in the control (n = 15) and intervention groups (n = 28), respectively. There was no significant change in scores in the control group (P = .07, CI -0.34, 2.01). The change in scores was statistically significant in the intervention group (P = .02, CI 0.23, 2.23). An independent samples t-test comparing the SCT score change for the control and intervention group showed no significant difference (P = .62, CI -1.18, 1.96).

SUMMARY

This study demonstrated the feasibility of implementing a SCT in experiential education. SCT scores did not significantly improve beyond the standard APPE in response to the focused educational intervention, but investigators found that the discussion facilitated rich conversations about patient cases and was valuable for assessing a student's thinking pattern.