A survey of clinical empathy training at UK medical schools.
Clinical empathy
Medical education
Survey
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Jan 2023
19 Jan 2023
Historique:
received:
13
10
2022
accepted:
28
12
2022
entrez:
19
1
2023
pubmed:
20
1
2023
medline:
24
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The benefits of enhancing practitioner empathy include better patient outcomes and improved job satisfaction for practitioners. Evidence suggests empathy can be taught and empathy is listed as an outcome for graduates in the General Medical Council requirements. Despite this, empathy training is not mandatory on medical school curricula and the extent to which medical students are given empathy-specific training is unknown. To conduct a survey of empathy training currently offered to medical students in UK medical schools. An invitation to participate in an online survey was sent to all UK medical schools (n = 40). The survey was developed through a consultancy and pilot process to ensure validity and reliability. Questions explored what empathy-focused training is offered, and asked educators whether or not they believed that current provision of empathy training is sufficient. In parallel, medical school websites were searched to identify what information regarding empathy-focused training is described as being part of the degree course. Descriptive statistics were used to describe empathy training delivery from the results of the online materials survey and closed survey questions. Thematic analysis was used to explore free text comments. Response rate was 70% (28/40), with 28 medical schools included in the analysis. Twenty-six schools reported that their undergraduate curriculum included some form of empathy-focused training with variation in what, when and how this is delivered. Thematic analysis revealed two overarching themes with associated sub-themes: (i) empathy-focused training and development (considering where, when and how empathy training should be integrated); (ii) challenges presented by including empathy on the curriculum (considering the system, students and faculty). All schools agreed empathy training should be on the undergraduate curriculum. This is the first nationwide survey of empathy-focused training at UK medical schools. While some form of empathy-focused training appears to be provided on the undergraduate curriculum at most UK medical schools, empathy is rarely specifically assessed. Most medical educators do not feel their school does enough to promote empathy and the majority would like to offer more.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The benefits of enhancing practitioner empathy include better patient outcomes and improved job satisfaction for practitioners. Evidence suggests empathy can be taught and empathy is listed as an outcome for graduates in the General Medical Council requirements. Despite this, empathy training is not mandatory on medical school curricula and the extent to which medical students are given empathy-specific training is unknown.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a survey of empathy training currently offered to medical students in UK medical schools.
METHODS
METHODS
An invitation to participate in an online survey was sent to all UK medical schools (n = 40). The survey was developed through a consultancy and pilot process to ensure validity and reliability. Questions explored what empathy-focused training is offered, and asked educators whether or not they believed that current provision of empathy training is sufficient. In parallel, medical school websites were searched to identify what information regarding empathy-focused training is described as being part of the degree course. Descriptive statistics were used to describe empathy training delivery from the results of the online materials survey and closed survey questions. Thematic analysis was used to explore free text comments.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Response rate was 70% (28/40), with 28 medical schools included in the analysis. Twenty-six schools reported that their undergraduate curriculum included some form of empathy-focused training with variation in what, when and how this is delivered. Thematic analysis revealed two overarching themes with associated sub-themes: (i) empathy-focused training and development (considering where, when and how empathy training should be integrated); (ii) challenges presented by including empathy on the curriculum (considering the system, students and faculty). All schools agreed empathy training should be on the undergraduate curriculum.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first nationwide survey of empathy-focused training at UK medical schools. While some form of empathy-focused training appears to be provided on the undergraduate curriculum at most UK medical schools, empathy is rarely specifically assessed. Most medical educators do not feel their school does enough to promote empathy and the majority would like to offer more.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36658502
doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03993-5
pii: 10.1186/s12909-022-03993-5
pmc: PMC9850684
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
40Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Med Educ. 2020 Jan;54(1):54-59
pubmed: 31452222
J Gen Intern Med. 2021 Oct;36(10):3179-3187
pubmed: 33886027
Int J Nurs Stud. 2020 Oct;110:103695
pubmed: 32736251
PLoS One. 2019 Aug 22;14(8):e0221412
pubmed: 31437225
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 09;9(4):e94207
pubmed: 24718585
BMJ Open. 2021 Sep 14;11(9):e045224
pubmed: 34521657
BMJ Open. 2020 Sep 25;10(9):e036471
pubmed: 32978187
BMC Med Educ. 2020 Feb 17;20(1):52
pubmed: 32066430
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2012;29(1):Doc11
pubmed: 22403596
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2001 Oct;26(5):331-42
pubmed: 11679023
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Oct 14;14:219
pubmed: 25315848
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010 Jul;70(1):143-8
pubmed: 20642558
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Dec;20(6):872-80
pubmed: 25266564
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 8;2:CD012418
pubmed: 33559127
BMJ. 2005 Feb 19;330(7488):403-4
pubmed: 15644554
Eval Health Prof. 2004 Sep;27(3):237-51
pubmed: 15312283
Med Health Care Philos. 2014 May;17(2):301-11
pubmed: 24343367
Burn Res. 2017 Sep;6:18-29
pubmed: 28868237
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Nov 08;8:758377
pubmed: 34820397
J R Soc Med. 2018 Jul;111(7):233-236
pubmed: 29978750
Med Educ. 1998 Jan;32(1):25-34
pubmed: 9624396
Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Mar;74(3):339-46
pubmed: 19124216
BMC Med Educ. 2021 May 22;21(1):292
pubmed: 34020647
Br J Gen Pract. 2002 Oct;52 Suppl:S9-12
pubmed: 12389763