Student Views on a Novel Holistic Surgical Education Curriculum (iG4): A Multi-national Survey in a Changing Landscape

The UEMS experience in continuous medical education accreditation process: a 'quo vadis' analysis of our global database

Background

The authors systematically appraise a large database of continuous professional development (CPD) and continuous medical education (CME) events against the European Accreditation Council for Continuous Medical Education (EACCME) framework.

Methods

The authors performed a retrospective observational study of all CPD or CME events within the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) database between 2017 and 2019, including 91 countries and 6034 events. Assessment of event design, quality and outcomes was evaluated against a validated, expert-derived accreditation framework, using thematic analysis to extract distinct themes, and subsequent quantitative analysis.

Results

The authors included 5649 live educational events (LEEs) and 385 e-learning materials (ELMs). Three thousand seven hundred sixty-two [3762 (62.3%)] of the events did not report clear justification in their needs assessment process. Most accreditation applications claimed covering a single educational need [1603/2277 (70.3%)]. Needs assessments were reported to be similar across conferences, courses and other types of events (P<0.01); 5642/6034 events (93.5%) had clearly documented expected learning outcomes; only 978/6034 (16.2%) reported a single expected learning outcome while the rest report 2-10 outcomes. Providers who declared more than one educational need also declared multiple learning outcomes (ρ=0.051, P<0.01).

Conclusions

Despite EACCME providing a robust framework for the CPD/CME accreditation process, reporting quality can still be improved, as more than 1 in 2 events fail to provide a clear description of their needs assessment. To the authors' knowledge, this is the largest educational LEE/ELM database, which can be a starting to revisit the CME/CPD accreditation process.

Mentoring Medical Students Towards Oncology: Results from a Pilot Multi-institutional Mentorship Programme

The mounting global cancer burden has generated an increasing demand for oncologists to join the workforce. Yet, students report limited oncology exposure in undergraduate medical curricula, while undergraduate oncology mentorships remain underutilised. We established an undergraduate oncology society-led mentorship programme aimed at medical students across several UK universities to increase medical student oncology exposure. We electronically recruited and paired oncologist mentors and medical student mentees and distributed a dedicated questionnaire (pre- and post-mentorship) to compare mentees' self-reported cancer specialty knowledge and oncology career motivation after undertaking a 6-week mentorship. We also determined students' interest across specialties and subspecialties and measured mentor availability via percentage programme uptake. Statistical analysis included univariate inferential tests on SPSS software. Twentynine (23.4%) of 124 oncology specialists agreed to become mentors. The mentorship was completed by 30 students across three medical schools: 16 (53.3%) Barts, 10 (33.3%) Birmingham, and 4 (13.3%) King's; 11 (36.7%) mentored by medical oncologists, 10 (33.3%) by clinical/radiation oncologists, and 9 (30%) by surgical oncologists. The mentorship generated a statically significant increase in students' knowledge of the multidisciplinary team and all oncology-related specialties including academia/research but not interest towards a career in oncology. Undergraduate oncology mentoring is an effective educational, networking and motivational tool for medical students. Student societies are a valuable asset in cultivating medical student oncology interest by connecting students to faculty and increasing mentor accessibility. Further research should focus on developing an optimal mentorship structure and evaluating long-term outcomes of such educational initiatives.

Teaching and Assessment of Medical Students During Complex Multifactorial Team-Based Tasks: The "Virtual on Call" Case Study

Abstract

Although considerable efforts have been made to incorporate simulation-based learning (SBL) in undergraduate medical education, to date, most of the medical school curricula still focus on pure knowledge or individual assessment of objective structured clinical examination skills (OSCE). To this end, we designed a case study named "iG4 (integrated generation 4) virtual on-call (iVOC)". We aimed to simulate an on-call shift in a high-fidelity virtual hospital setting in order to assess delegates' team-based performance on tasks related to patient handovers (prioritisation, team allocation).

Methods

A total of 41 clinical year medical students were split into 3 cohorts, each of which included 3 groups of 4 or 5 people. The groups consisted of a structured mix of educational and cultural backgrounds of students to achieve homogeneity. Each performing group received the handover for 5 patients in the virtual hospital and had to identify and deal with the acutely unwell ones within 15 minutes. We used TEAMTM tool to assess team-based performances.

Results

The mean handover performance was 5.44/10 ± 2.24 which was the lowest across any performance marker. The overall global performance across any team was 6.64/10 ± 2.11. The first rotating team's global performance for each cycle was 6.44/10 ± 2.01, for the second 7.89/10 ± 2.09 and for the third 6.78/10 ± 1.64 (p = 0.099 between groups).

Conclusion

This is one of the first reported, high-fidelity, globally reproducible SBL settings to assess the capacity of students to work as part of a multinational team, highlighting several aspects that need to be addressed during undergraduate studies. Medical schools should consider similar efforts with the aim to incorporate assessment frameworks for individual performances of students as part of a team, which can be a stepping-stone for enhancing safety in clinical practice.

In vivo Simulation-Based Learning for Undergraduate Medical Students: Teaching and Assessment

An increasing emphasis on simulation has become evident in the last three decades following fundamental shifts in the medical profession. Simulation-based learning (SBL) is a wide term that encompasses several means for imitating a skill, attitude, or procedure to train personnel in a safe and adaptive environment. A classic example has been the use of live animal tissue, named in vivo SBL. We aimed to review all published evidence on in vivo SBL for undergraduate medical students; this includes both teaching concepts as well as focused assessment of students on those concepts. We performed a systematic review of published evidence on MEDLINE. We also incorporated evidence from a series of systematic reviews (eviCORE) focused on undergraduate education which have been outputs from our dedicated research network (eMERG). In vivo SBL has been shown to be valuable at undergraduate level and should be considered as a potential educational tool. Strict adherence to 3R (Reduce, Refine, Replace) principles in order to reduce animal tissue usage, should always be the basis of any curriculum. In vivo SBL could potentially grant an extra mile towards medical students' inspiration and aspiration to become safe surgeons; however, it should be optimised and supported by a well-designed curriculum which enhances learning via multi-level fidelity SBL.

Inspiring the future generation of oncologists: a UK-wide study of medical students' views towards oncology

BACKGROUND

One in 2 people born in the UK after 1960 are expected to require oncology input in their lifetime. However, only 36% of UK medical schools provide dedicated oncology placements and teaching indicating a discordance between public health impact and training. We designed a UK-wide survey to capture medical students' views on current oncology teaching and the potential role of a national undergraduate oncology symposium as an educational, networking and motivational tool.

METHODS

We undertook a national cross-sectional survey of UK medical students' views in oncology and satisfaction with teaching using pre-designed questionnaires. We also distributed a dedicated survey (pre and post-conference) to compare medical students' motivation towards a career in oncology after attending the national symposium. This study was prospectively approved by QMUL Ethics Committee (Reference number QMREC2348). Statistical analysis included univariate inferential tests on SPSS and GraphPad software.

RESULTS

The national survey was completed by 166 students representing 22 UK medical schools. Students reported limited interest, knowledge and exposure to oncology, lack of confidence in skills, and teaching dissatisfaction. Oncology was perceived as a challenging specialty (mean 4.5/5 ± 0.7), yet most students estimate receiving only 1-2 weeks of dedicated oncology teaching. The national symposium generated a statically significant increase in students' interest, knowledge, and confidence in skills surrounding oncology, improving students' perceived ability to cope with the emotional challenges in this field.

CONCLUSION

Students' views towards oncology alongside their teaching dissatisfaction underpin the need to revisit and strive to improve current undergraduate oncology curricula. Increasing medical student oncology exposure by proposing outcome-based guidelines and adopting a standardised undergraduate oncology curriculum should be the foremost priority in inspiring future oncologists to ensure excellent cancer patient care.

ABC of Surgical Teaching: Time to Consider a Global Blueprint for Holistic Education

BACKGROUND

Educating and equipping students and trainees into clinicians capable of meeting healthcare demands and service provision needs is essential. Unprecedented events like COVID-19 pandemic, highlight urgent need for reformation of training to ensure high quality education is maintained. To this end, we describe an innovative and globally adaptable blueprint for establishing a surgical curriculum, aiming to optimize preparation of future surgeons.

METHODS

We used a structured protocol to synthesize evidence from previous systematic reviews focused on surgical education alongside a series of focused original educational studies. This approach allowed incorporation of prospectively applied novel ideas into the existing landscape of published evidence. All material used for this proof of concept derives from the outputs of a dedicated research network for surgical education (eMERG).

RESULTS

We propose the foundation blueprint framework called "Omnigon iG4" as a globally applicable model. It allows adaptation to individual local educational environments for designing, appraising and/or refining surgical curricula. We also describe the "Omnigon iG4 Hexagon Pragmatic Model," a novel perspective model which assesses the performance of our blueprint in a multi-layer fashion. This "Hexagon" model is the first to introduce pragmatic outcomes in curricula performance assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

This proof of concept, "Omnigon iG4," proposes an adaptable version of a curriculum blueprint. The framework allows educators to establish a surgical curriculum with the ability to map out competencies, permitting full control over their intended learning outcomes. This can form the basis for developing globally adaptable multifaceted Simulation-Based learning (SBL) courses or even surgical curricula for undergraduates.