Search

Abstract Background Substantial work has been done to update or create evidence-based practices (EBPs) in the changing health care landscape. However, the success of these EBPs is limited by low levels of clinician implementation. Objective The goal of this study is to describe the use of standardized/simulated patient/person (SP) methodology as a framework to develop implementation bundles to increase the effectiveness, sustainability, and reproducibility of EBPs across health care clinicians. Design We observed 12 clinicians’ first-time experiences with six unique decision-making algorithms, developed previously using rigorous Delphi methods, for use with patients exhibiting concerning behaviors associated with long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain. Clinicians were paired with two SPs trained to portray individuals with one of the concerning behaviors addressed by the algorithms in a telehealth environment. The SP evaluations were followed by individual interviews, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), with each of the clinician participants. Participants Twelve primary care clinicians and 24 SPs in Western Pennsylvania. Main measurement The primary outcome was identifying likely facilitators for the successful implementation of the EBP using the SP methodology. Our secondary outcome was to assess the feasibility of using SPs to illuminate likely implementation barriers and facilitators. Results The SP portrayal illuminated factors that were pertinent to address in the implementation bundle. SPs were realistic in their portrayal of patients with concerning behaviors associated with LTOT for chronic pain, but clinicians also noted that their patients in practice may have been more aggressive about their treatment plan. Conclusions SP simulation provides unique opportunities for obtaining crucial feedback to identify best practices in the adoption of new EBPs for high-risk patients. Setting Zoom simulated patient evaluations.

Introduction Verbal de-escalation is an essential skill for physicians across specialties and is the first-line intervention for patients who present with agitation. Training in verbal de-escalation for medical students is less robust compared to other health care disciplines. We describe the creation and evaluation of a novel verbal de-escalation curriculum for third- and fourth-year medical students on their psychiatry clerkship rotation. Method We developed a simulation using standardized patient (SP) methodology and a dedicated reflection session, implementing it in the third-year psychiatry clerkship. Participants in the scenario received targeted feedback from their peers and SPs. The sessions were video recorded, and a random sample was selected and reviewed to identify key observations and themes from student performance. Results A total of 139 students participated in the encounter. One hundred twenty-two of 125 students (82%) stated the activity met the learning objectives, with 108 (86%) assigning the letter grade A to the activity. Written feedback indicated that the majority of students believed the activity to be realistic, instructive, and helpful but felt the SPs de-escalated too quickly. Video review of the encounters found that while the students effectively used the skills, many jumped to a quick fix, and some offered inappropriate choices to end the encounter. Discussion This SP activity was effective in allowing students to practice skills in a safe setting and was valued by students. In the future, adding another workshop in the fourth year could facilitate higher retention and practice of skills.