As the population ages, more people will have comorbid disorders and polypharmacy. Medication should be reviewed regularly in order to avoid adverse drug reactions and medication-related hospital visits, but this is often not done. As part of our student-run clinic project, we investigated whether an interprofessional student-run medication review program (ISP) added to standard care at a geriatric outpatient clinic leads to better prescribing. In this controlled clinical trial, patients visiting a memory outpatient clinic were allocated to standard care (control group) or standard care plus the ISP team (intervention group). The medications of all patients were reviewed by a review panel (“gold standard”), resident, and in the intervention arm also by an ISP team consisting of a group of students from the medicine and pharmacy faculties and students from the higher education school of nursing for advanced nursing practice. For both groups, the number of STOPP/START-based medication changes mentioned in general practitioner (GP) correspondence and the implementation of these changes about 6 weeks after the outpatient visit were investigated. The data of 216 patients were analyzed (control group = 100, intervention group = 116). More recommendations for STOPP/STARTbased medication changes were made in the GP correspondence in the intervention group than in the control group (43% vs. 24%, P = < 0.001). After 6 weeks, a significantly higher proportion of these changes were implemented in the intervention group (19% vs. 9%, P = 0.001). The ISP team, in addition to standard care, is an effective intervention for optimizing pharmacotherapy and medication safety in a geriatric outpatient clinic.
MULTIFILE
Abstract Aims The involvement of an inter-professional healthcare student team in the review of medications used by geriatric patients could not only provide patients with optimized therapy but also provide students with a valuable inter-professional learning experience. We describe and evaluate the clinical and learning outcomes of an inter-professional student-run mediation review program (ISP). Subject and method A variable team consisting of students in medicine, pharmacy, master advanced nursing practice, and master physician assistant reviewed the medication lists of patients attending a specialized geriatric outpatient clinic. Results During 32 outpatient visits, 188 medications were reviewed. The students identified 14 medication-related problems, of which 4 were not recognized by healthcare professionals. The ISP team advised 95 medication changes, of which 68 (71.6%) were directly implemented. Students evaluated this pilot program positively and considered it educational (median score 4 out of 5) and thought it would contribute to their future inter-professional relationships. Conclusion An inter-professional team of healthcare students is an innovative healthcare improvement for (academic) hospitals to increase medication safety. Most formulated advices were directly incorporated in daily practice and could prevent future medication-related harm. The ISP also offers students a first opportunity to work in an inter-professional manner and get insight into the perspectives and qualities of their future colleagues.
MULTIFILE
Background: Clinical reasoning skills are considered to be among the key competencies a physiotherapist should possess. Yet, we know little about how physiotherapy students actually learn these skills in the workplace. A better understanding will benefit physiotherapy education.Objectives: To explore how undergraduate physiotherapy students learn clinical reasoning skills during placements.Design: A qualitative research design using focus groups and semi-structured interviews.Setting: European School of Physiotherapy, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Participants: Twenty-two undergraduate physiotherapy students and eight clinical teachers participated in this study.Main outcome measures: Thematic analysis of focus groups and semi-structured interviews.Results: Three overarching factors appeared to influence the process of learning clinical reasoning skills: the learning environment, the clinical teacher and the student. Preclinical training failed to adequately prepare students for clinical practice, which expected them to integrate physiotherapeutic knowledge and skills into a cyclic reasoning process. Students’ basic knowledge and assessment structure therefore required further development during the placements. Clinical teachers expected a holistic, multifactorial problem-solving approach from their students. Both students and teachers considered feedback and reflection essential to clinical learning. Barriers to learning experienced by students included time constraints, limited patient exposure and patient communication.Conclusions: Undergraduate physiotherapy students develop clinical reasoning skills through comparison of and reflection on different reasoning approaches observed in professional therapists. Over time, students learn to synthesise these different approaches into their own individual approach. Physiotherapy programme developers should aim to include a wide variety of multidisciplinary settings and patient categories in their clinical placements.
communicative participation, language disordersOBJECTIVE(S)/RESEARCH QUESTION(S) Speech and language therapists (SLTs) are the primary care professionals to treat language and communication disorders. Their treatment is informed by a variety of outcome measures. At present, diagnosis, monitoring of progress and evaluation are often based on performance-based and clinician-reported outcomes such as results of standardized speech, language, voice, or communication tests. These tests typically aim to capture how well the person can produce or understand language in a controlled situation, and therefore only provide limited insight in the person’s challenges in life. Performance measures do not incorporate the unobservable feelings such as a patient's effort, social embarrassment, difficulty, or confidence in communication. Nor do they address language and communication difficulties experienced by the person themselves, the impact on daily life or allow patients to set goals related to their own needs and wishes. The aim of our study is give our patients a voice and empower SLTs to incorporate their patient's perspective in planning therapy. We will Aangemaakt door ProjectNet / Generated by ProjectNet: 08-12-2020 12:072Subsidieaanvraag_digitaal / Grant Application_digitaalDossier nummer / Dossier number: 80-86900-98-041DEFINITIEFdevelop a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measure that provides information on communicative participation of people with communication disorders and integrate this item bank in patient specific goal setting in speech and language therapy. Both the item bank and the goal setting method will be adapted in cocreation with patients to enable access for people with communication difficulties.STUDY DESIGN Mixed methods research design following the MRC guidance for process evaluation of complex interventions, using PROMIS methodology including psychometric evaluation and an iterative user-centered design with qualitative co-creation methods to develop accessible items and the goal setting method.RESEARCH POPULATION Children, adolescents and adults with speech, language, hearing, and voice disorders.OUTCOME MEASURES An online patient-reported outcome measure on communicative participation, the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB), CPIB items that are accessible for people with language understanding difficulties, a communicative-participation person-specific goal setting method developed with speech and language therapists and patients and tested on usability and feasibility in clinical practice, and a course for SLTs explaining the use of the goal-setting method in their clinical reasoning process.RELEVANCE This study answers one of the prioritized questions in the call for SLTs to systematically and reliably incorporate the clients’ perspective in their daily practice to improve the quality of SLT services. At present patient reported outcomes play only a small role in speech and language therapy because 1) measures (PROMS) are often invalid, not implemented and unsuitable for clinical practice and 2) there is a knowledge gap in how to capture and interpret outcomes from persons with language disorders.
