A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Using the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Model for Continuous Quality Improvement of an Established Simulated Patient Program. | LitMetric

Objective: To describe the use of a continuous quality improvement process for strengthening our simulated patient (SP) program and the initial steps that have been implemented.

Innovation: A workgroup that included five clinical faculty with significant experience working with SPs and a strong interest in improving the SP program was developed. The Plan-Do-Study-Act model was used as it allowed for incremental quality improvement changes, in order to ensure a high-quality SP program designed to optimize student learning. Data were gathered from students, SPs, and faculty. Opportunities for improvement were prioritized based on anticipated benefits and available resources. Changes related to planning, implementation, and evaluation and feedback have been executed.

Critical Analysis: Changes related to planning that were implemented included developing handbooks for SPs, faculty, and graduate student instructors, as well as material for students in order to better describe the program. SPs are now referred to as "simulated" as opposed to "standardized" as part of a broader effort to clarify the purpose of SP interactions to students. Streamlined rubrics have been piloted, including electronic rubrics for first year students. SPs are being trained on fewer cases, in order to improve the training program. When possible, activities now take place in one large classroom instead of many small classrooms to improve oversight. Finally, additional feedback has been obtained from SPs via a retreat. These changes have been well received by students, SPs, and faculty.

Next Steps: The collection of this data and initial quality improvement changes provided a basis for hiring a full-time employee who will: dedicate 50% of their time to programmatic assessment of the SP program, support faculty with logistics and training, and be the face of our program to the students and SPs. Further, formal quantitative and qualitative assessment of the SP program has begun.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6438543PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.24926/iip.v9i2.989DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

quality improvement
16
students sps
16
program
9
continuous quality
8
simulated patient
8
patient program
8
sps
8
improvement changes
8
sps faculty
8
changes planning
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!