Cargando…

Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions

BACKGROUND: The growing need for palliative care (PC) among patients with serious illness is outstripped by the short supply of PC specialists. This mismatch calls for competency of all health care providers in primary PC, including patient-centered communication, management of pain and other sympto...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kozhevnikov, Dmitry, Morrison, Laura J, Ellman, Matthew S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6292390/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30574008
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S153630
_version_ 1783380390210174976
author Kozhevnikov, Dmitry
Morrison, Laura J
Ellman, Matthew S
author_facet Kozhevnikov, Dmitry
Morrison, Laura J
Ellman, Matthew S
author_sort Kozhevnikov, Dmitry
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The growing need for palliative care (PC) among patients with serious illness is outstripped by the short supply of PC specialists. This mismatch calls for competency of all health care providers in primary PC, including patient-centered communication, management of pain and other symptoms, and interprofessional teamwork. Simulation-based medical education (SBME) has emerged as a promising modality to teach key skills and close the educational gap. This paper describes the current state of SBME in training of PC skills. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature reporting on simulation experiences addressing PC skills for clinical learners in medicine and nursing. We collected data on learner characteristics, the method and content of the simulation, and outcome assessments. RESULTS: In a total of 78 studies, 76% involved learners from medicine and 38% involved learners from nursing, while social work (6%) and spiritual care (3%) learners were significantly underrepresented. Only 16% of studies involved collaboration between participants at different training levels. The standardized patient encounter was the most popular simulation method, accounting for 68% of all studies. Eliciting treatment preferences (50%), delivering bad news (41%), and providing empathic communication (40%) were the most commonly addressed skills, while symptom management was only addressed in 13% of studies. The most common method of simulation evaluation was subjective participant feedback (62%). Only 4% of studies examined patient outcomes. In 22% of studies, simulation outcomes were not measured at all. DISCUSSION: We describe the current state of SBME in PC education, highlighting advances over recent decades and identifying gaps and opportunities for future directions. We recommend designing SBME for a broader range of learners and for interprofessional skill building. We advocate for expansion of skill content, especially symptom management education. Finally, evaluation of SBME in PC training should be more rigorous with a shift to include more patient outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6292390
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62923902018-12-20 Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions Kozhevnikov, Dmitry Morrison, Laura J Ellman, Matthew S Adv Med Educ Pract Review BACKGROUND: The growing need for palliative care (PC) among patients with serious illness is outstripped by the short supply of PC specialists. This mismatch calls for competency of all health care providers in primary PC, including patient-centered communication, management of pain and other symptoms, and interprofessional teamwork. Simulation-based medical education (SBME) has emerged as a promising modality to teach key skills and close the educational gap. This paper describes the current state of SBME in training of PC skills. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature reporting on simulation experiences addressing PC skills for clinical learners in medicine and nursing. We collected data on learner characteristics, the method and content of the simulation, and outcome assessments. RESULTS: In a total of 78 studies, 76% involved learners from medicine and 38% involved learners from nursing, while social work (6%) and spiritual care (3%) learners were significantly underrepresented. Only 16% of studies involved collaboration between participants at different training levels. The standardized patient encounter was the most popular simulation method, accounting for 68% of all studies. Eliciting treatment preferences (50%), delivering bad news (41%), and providing empathic communication (40%) were the most commonly addressed skills, while symptom management was only addressed in 13% of studies. The most common method of simulation evaluation was subjective participant feedback (62%). Only 4% of studies examined patient outcomes. In 22% of studies, simulation outcomes were not measured at all. DISCUSSION: We describe the current state of SBME in PC education, highlighting advances over recent decades and identifying gaps and opportunities for future directions. We recommend designing SBME for a broader range of learners and for interprofessional skill building. We advocate for expansion of skill content, especially symptom management education. Finally, evaluation of SBME in PC training should be more rigorous with a shift to include more patient outcomes. Dove Medical Press 2018-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6292390/ /pubmed/30574008 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S153630 Text en © 2018 Kozhevnikov et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Kozhevnikov, Dmitry
Morrison, Laura J
Ellman, Matthew S
Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions
title Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions
title_full Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions
title_fullStr Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions
title_full_unstemmed Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions
title_short Simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions
title_sort simulation training in palliative care: state of the art and future directions
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6292390/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30574008
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S153630
work_keys_str_mv AT kozhevnikovdmitry simulationtraininginpalliativecarestateoftheartandfuturedirections
AT morrisonlauraj simulationtraininginpalliativecarestateoftheartandfuturedirections
AT ellmanmatthews simulationtraininginpalliativecarestateoftheartandfuturedirections