RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collection and utilization improves patient-provider communication, symptom reporting, and patient satisfaction. Despite their significance, the science and utility of PROs are not part of required curriculum in medical education. The authors describe the results of a survey distributed to medical students evaluating their experience, knowledge, and perceptions of PROs, report on outcomes of the impact of formal PRO education on medical student knowledge, and describe strategies to foster the spread of PRO education into other programs. METHODS: The authors developed and distributed a 20-question web-based survey distributed to medical students at two U.S. medical schools to evaluate students' experience, knowledge, and perceptions of PROs. To compare medical students' knowledge in their pre-clinical years (M1-M2) to those in their clinical years (M3-M4), the authors calculated odds ratios and determined significance determined using chi-squared tests. To determine the utility of formal education on medical students' knowledge of PROs, the authors invited 4th year medical students at a single institution to participate in a survey before and two weeks after receiving formal PRO education as part of the medical school curriculum, spanning three years. RESULTS: 137 (15%) medical students responded to the initial survey. Respondents' knowledge of PROs was low and did not differ when comparing pre-clinical to clinical years in school. Less than 10% had received education on PROs and only 16% felt prepared to use PROs in patient care. Respondents demonstrated positive attitudes towards PROs, with 84% expressing interest in learning about PROs. In the second phase education cohort of 231 (77% response rate) 4th -year medical students over three years, formal education improved correct response rates to PRO questions. After education, 90% (121/134) agreed PROs are an important component of high-quality care. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies a gap in knowledge about PROs among medical students irrespective of year in training. It also shows that structured education may help fill the PRO knowledge gap, potentially providing future clinicians with the skills to implement PROs into clinical practice, aligning with the broader shift towards patient-centric evidence-based healthcare practices.
Asunto(s)
Educación Médica , Estudiantes de Medicina , Humanos , Competencia Clínica , Curriculum , Medición de Resultados Informados por el PacienteRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) are used off-label, in both adult and pediatric patients, to help further neuro-recovery after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Evidence is limited and piecemeal. This review describes how TBI affects the cholinergic system and consolidates evidence supporting or refuting the use of AChEIs following TBI. METHODS: NCBI MEDLINE search included all articles published through March 2021 on AChEI use in acute and post-acute adult TBI rehabilitation (treatment began <90 days or ≥90 days since injury, respectively), and in pediatric TBI rehabilitation. Further, we checked ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing trials using AChEIs for TBI rehabilitation in the United States. RESULTS: 27 original articles from NCBI Medline, published through March 2021, were included. The use of AChEIs following TBI in acute and post-acute rehabilitation settings, in both adult and pediatric patients, along with medication side effects, is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies showed benefits with only moderate effect sizes because of small sample sizes. Reported side effects are minimal and stop soon after AChEIs is discontinued. Conclusions are limited by paucity of research; but fortunately, a large randomized controlled trial is ongoing, and more are needed to truly determine the efficacy of AChEIs in helping with recovery from TBI.