Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T15:28:18.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Description of a teaching method for research education for palliative care healthcare professionals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2014

Wadih Rhondali Open the ORCID record for Wadih Rhondali [Opens in a new window] ,
Linh My Thi Nguyen ,
Michelle Peck ,
Fabienne Vallet ,
Serge Daneault  and
Marilene Filbet
Wadih Rhondali*
Affiliation:
Department of Palliative Care, Centre Hospitalier de Lyon–Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France Department of Palliative Care and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
Linh My Thi Nguyen
Affiliation:
The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, Texas
Michelle Peck
Affiliation:
The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, Texas
Fabienne Vallet
Affiliation:
Department of Palliative Care, Centre Hospitalier William-Morey, Chalon-sur-Saône, France
Serge Daneault
Affiliation:
Palliative Care Unit, Notre Dame Hospital, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, Canada
Marilene Filbet
Affiliation:
Department of Palliative Care, Centre Hospitalier de Lyon–Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Wadih Rhondali, Department of Palliative Care, Centre Hospitalier Lyon–Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon. 165, Chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite Cedex, France. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

Despite the rapidly growing availability of palliative care services, there is still much to be done in order to better support clinicians who are starting research programs. Among the barriers identified in the literature, methodological issues and lack of research training programs are often reported. Our aim was to describe an educational research method for healthcare professionals working in palliative care and to report the result of a survey conducted among a three-year sample of students.

Method:

The course was provided for a multidisciplinary group and was open to all healthcare professionals involved in palliative care. It took place over a single session during a full day. We used a 20-question e-survey to assess student outcomes (e.g., satisfaction, current status of their project).

Results:

We received answers from 83 of the 119 students (70%) who took the course. The majority were physicians (n = 62, 75%), followed by nurses (n = 17, 21%). During the class, students assessed the role of the teacher as an information provider (n = 51, 61%), role model (n = 36, 43%), and facilitator (n = 33, 40%), and considered all of these roles as suitable, with a score of 3.9–4.7 out of 5. Participants reported a high level of support from the teacher, with a mean score of 8.2 (SD, 1.7) out of 10, and good overall satisfaction with a mean score of 7.6 (1.8). Finally, 51 participants (77%) were able to start their research project after the class, 27 (41%) to complete it, and 8 (12%) to submit their research to a journal or conference.

Significance of results:

Our results suggest that newer teaching methods such as roleplay, group work, and target acquisition are feasible and effective in a palliative research curriculum. Additional studies are needed to confirm the objective outputs of educational interventions, including research outputs.

Keywords

Education designResearchPalliative care
Type
Original Articles
Information
Palliative & Supportive Care , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , April 2015 , pp. 249 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allery, L. (2012). Use small groups to invigorate your teaching. Education for Primary Care, 23(6), 446–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnsteiner, J.H., Disch, J.M., Hall, L., et al. (2007). Promoting inter-professional education. Nursing Outlook, 55(3), 144–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruera, E., Billings, J.A., Lupu, D., et al. (2010). AAHPM position paper: Requirements for the successful development of academic palliative care programs. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 39(4), 743–755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bulte, C., Betts, A., Garner, K., et al. (2007). Student teaching: Views of student near-peer teachers and learners. Medical Teacher, 29(6), 583–590.Google Scholar
Davies, P.G. & Farmer, E.A. (1992). Teaching the students: Teaching communication skills in small groups. The Medical Journal of Australia, 156(4), 259–260.Google Scholar
Elsner, F., Centeno, C., de Conno, F., et al. (2009). Recommendations of the EAPC for the development of postgraduate curricula leading to certification in palliative medicine. Available from www.eapcnet.eu/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=2DHXbM1zaMI%3d.Google Scholar
Filbet, M., Centeno, C., de Conno, F., et al. (2007). Curriculum in palliative care for undergraduate medical education. Available from http://www.eapcnet.eu/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=VmnUSgQm5PQ%3D.Google Scholar
Hauer, J. & Quill, T. (2011). Educational needs assessment, development of learning objectives, and choosing a teaching approach. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 14(4), 503–508.Google Scholar
Hebert, R.S., Levine, R.B., Smith, C.G., et al. (2003). A systematic review of resident research curricula. Academic Medicine, 78(1), 61–68.Google Scholar
Hui, D., Elsayem, A., de la Cruz, M., et al. (2010). Availability and integration of palliative care at U.S. cancer centers. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 303(11), 1054–1061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hui, D., Parsons, H.A., Damani, S., et al. (2011). Quantity, design, and scope of the palliative oncology literature. The Oncologist, 16(5), 694–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaques, D. (2003). Teaching small groups. BMJ, 326(7387), 492–494.Google Scholar
Jones, R.W. (2007). Learning and teaching in small groups: Characteristics, benefits, problems and approaches. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, 35(4), 587–592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaasa, S. & Dale, O. (2005). Building up research in palliative care: An historical perspective and a case for the future. Clinics in Geriatric Medicine, 21(1), 81–92.Google Scholar
Kaasa, S. & de Conno, F. (2001). Palliative care research. European Journal of Cancer, 37(Suppl. 8(0)), 153–159.Google Scholar
Kuipers, J.C. & Clemens, D.L. (1998). Do I dare? Using role-play as a teaching strategy. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 36(7), 12–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macauley, R. & Billings, J.A. (2011). Teaching small groups in palliative care. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 14(1), 91–95.Google Scholar
Mitchell, P.H., Belza, B., Schaad, D.C., et al. (2006). Working across the boundaries of health professions disciplines in education, research, and service: The University of Washington experience. Academic Medicine, 81(10), 891–896.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, S.A. & Turner, J.M. (2008). Research methodologies in palliative care: A bibliometric analysis. Palliative Medicine, 22(4), 336–342.Google Scholar
Reeves, S., Zwarenstein, M., Goldman, J., et al. (2008). Inter-professional education: Effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 28(3), CD002213. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002213.pub3.Google Scholar
Rhondali, W., Berthiller, J., Hui, D., et al. (2013). Barriers to research in palliative care in France. BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care. Available from http://spcare.bmj.com/content/early/2013/04/18/bmjspcare-2012-000360.abstract. Epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
Rosnow, R.L. (1990). Teaching research ethics through role-play and discussion. Teaching of Psychology, 17(3), 179–181.Google Scholar
Seehusen, D.A. & Weaver, S.P. (2009). Resident research in family medicine: Where are we now? Family Medicine, 41(9), 663–668.Google Scholar
Seymour, J. (2012). Combined qualitative and quantitative research designs. Current Opinions in Supportive and Palliative Care, 6(4), 514–524.Google Scholar
Sigurdardottir, K.R., Haugen, D.F., van der Rijt, C.C.D., et al. (2010). Clinical priorities, barriers and solutions in end-of-life cancer care research across Europe: Report from a workshop. European Journal of Cancer, 46(10), 1815–1822.Google Scholar
Sigurdardottir, K., Haugen, D., Bausewein, C., et al. (2012). A pan-European survey of research in end-of-life cancer care. Supportive Care in Cancer, 20(1), 39–48.Google Scholar
Simpson, M.A. (1985). How to use role-play in medical teaching. Medical Teacher, 7(1), 75–82.Google Scholar
Strohmetz, D.B. & Skleder, A.A. (1992). The use of role-play in teaching research ethics: A validation study. Teaching of Psychology, 19(2), 106–108.Google Scholar
Wise, P.S. (1980). Methods of teaching: Revisited. Character play and role play. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 11(1), 37–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wohleber, A.M., McKitrick, D.S. & Davis, S.E. (2012). Designing research with hospice and palliative care populations. American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Care, 29(5), 335–345.Google Scholar