Coaching for Chaos: A Qualitative Study of Instructional Methods for Multipatient Management in the Emergency Department.
Journal
AEM education and training
ISSN: 2472-5390
Titre abrégé: AEM Educ Train
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101722142
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
17
09
2018
revised:
14
11
2018
accepted:
19
11
2018
entrez:
23
4
2019
pubmed:
23
4
2019
medline:
23
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Busy environments, like the emergency department (ED), require teachers to develop instructional strategies for coaching trainees to function within these same environments. Few studies have documented the strategies used by emergency physician (EP)-teachers within these busy, chaotic environments, instead emphasizing teaching in more predictable environments such as the outpatient clinic, hospital wards, or operating room. The authors sought to discover what strategies EP-teachers were using and what trainees recalled experiencing when learning to handle these unpredictable, overcrowded, complex, multipatient environments. An interpretive description study was conducted at multiple teaching hospitals affiliated with McMaster University from July 2014 to May 2015. Participants (10 EP-teachers and 10 junior residents) were asked to recall teaching strategies related to handling ED patient flow. Participants were asked to describe techniques that they used, observed, or experienced as trainees. Two independent coders read through interview transcripts, analyzing these documents inductively and iteratively. Two main types of strategies to teach ED management were discovered: 1) workplace-based methods, including both observation and in situ instruction; and 2) principle-based advice. The most often described techniques were workplace-based methods, which included a variety of in situ techniques ranging from conversations to managerial coaching (e.g., collaborative problem-solving of real-life administrative dilemmas). A mix of strategies are used to teach and coach trainees to handle multipatient environments. Further research is required to determine how to optimize the use of these techniques and innovate new strategies to support the learning of these crucial skills.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Busy environments, like the emergency department (ED), require teachers to develop instructional strategies for coaching trainees to function within these same environments. Few studies have documented the strategies used by emergency physician (EP)-teachers within these busy, chaotic environments, instead emphasizing teaching in more predictable environments such as the outpatient clinic, hospital wards, or operating room. The authors sought to discover what strategies EP-teachers were using and what trainees recalled experiencing when learning to handle these unpredictable, overcrowded, complex, multipatient environments.
METHOD
METHODS
An interpretive description study was conducted at multiple teaching hospitals affiliated with McMaster University from July 2014 to May 2015. Participants (10 EP-teachers and 10 junior residents) were asked to recall teaching strategies related to handling ED patient flow. Participants were asked to describe techniques that they used, observed, or experienced as trainees. Two independent coders read through interview transcripts, analyzing these documents inductively and iteratively.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Two main types of strategies to teach ED management were discovered: 1) workplace-based methods, including both observation and in situ instruction; and 2) principle-based advice. The most often described techniques were workplace-based methods, which included a variety of in situ techniques ranging from conversations to managerial coaching (e.g., collaborative problem-solving of real-life administrative dilemmas).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
A mix of strategies are used to teach and coach trainees to handle multipatient environments. Further research is required to determine how to optimize the use of these techniques and innovate new strategies to support the learning of these crucial skills.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31008426
doi: 10.1002/aet2.10312
pii: AET210312
pmc: PMC6457384
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
145-155Références
West J Emerg Med. 2018 Jan;19(1):198-204
pubmed: 29383081
Emerg Med J. 2012 Nov;29(11):868-71
pubmed: 22199142
Acad Med. 2017 Sep;92(9):1303-1312
pubmed: 28272114
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2018 Aug;23(3):587-599
pubmed: 29455445
Emerg Med J. 2012 Jun;29(6):460-6
pubmed: 21653203
Perspect Med Educ. 2017 Dec;6(6):380-387
pubmed: 29119470
CJEM. 2018 Jul;20(4):491-492
pubmed: 30033896
Acad Med. 2019 Jan;94(1):66-70
pubmed: 29979206
Hum Factors. 2008 Jun;50(3):456-60
pubmed: 18689053
Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Jul;25(7):795-803
pubmed: 29265539
BMC Emerg Med. 2011 Oct 07;11:16
pubmed: 21982119
Healthc Q. 2009;12(3):99-106
pubmed: 19553772
Nurse Educ Pract. 2010 Nov;10(6):333-40
pubmed: 20356794
Acad Med. 2018 May;93(5):786-793
pubmed: 29210754
Acad Emerg Med. 2013 Jul;20(7):730-5
pubmed: 23859587
Acad Emerg Med. 2017 Jan;24(1):117-119
pubmed: 27706871
Perspect Med Educ. 2017 Dec;6(6):363-365
pubmed: 29170985
Acad Med. 2015 May;90(5):609-14
pubmed: 25406607
AEM Educ Train. 2018 Dec 28;3(2):145-155
pubmed: 31008426
Med J Aust. 2008 Feb 18;188(4):243-6
pubmed: 18279135
J Grad Med Educ. 2015 Dec;7(4):700-4
pubmed: 26692998
J Gen Intern Med. 1998 Feb;13(2):111-6
pubmed: 9502371
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009 Oct;14(4):535-46
pubmed: 18798005
Acad Med. 2016 Jun;91(6):757-60
pubmed: 26934694
Perspect Med Educ. 2014 Apr;3(2):76-88
pubmed: 24049043
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285