Music performance anxiety (MPA) is a commonly present topic among musicians. Most studies on MPA investigated effects of a more general occurrence of MPA on performances. Less is known about individual variations of MPA within a performance, more specifically at the times before, during, and after the performance. This study used a questionnaire to investigate these performance times in order to find out if there occur different types in the variation of the perceived MPA across the performance. The study was performed with 532 musicians; 27% of them being professional orchestra musicians, 45% non-professional orchestra musicians, and 28% non-professional choir singers. The musicians were asked to fill in the Performance-specific Questionnaire for Musicians (PQM) immediately after a performance. The questionnaire contains three scales regarding symptoms of MPA, functional coping with MPA and performance-related self-efficacy. A cluster analysis was performed on the PQM scales to identify systematic variations. Findings indicate that there are three different types of MPA in the sample studied. Type 1 describes musicians who have few symptoms of MPA throughout the performance, show functional coping with MPA, and have a stable and well-developed self-efficacy. Type 2 describes musicians who begin their performance with rather high symptoms of MPA but can positively reduce these by the end of the performance and show high values in self-efficacy and in functional coping. Type 3 contains musicians who begin their performance with some symptoms of MPA, which increase to the end of the performance. The values of self-efficacy and functional coping in this type are rather low. Of the total sample, half of the musicians were assigned to Type 1 and approximately a quarter each to Type 2 (27%) and Type 3 (23%). In accordance with the literature, the results confirm the importance of self-efficacy and functional coping for a positive performance experience.

Most studies exploring the relation between flow and Music Performance Anxiety (MPA) have focused on the disposition of generally experiencing flow and the occurrence of MPA. Little is known about the connection between experiencing flow and MPA as it relates to a specific performance. In this study, flow and MPA have been investigated in 363 orchestral musicians in relation to a particular live music performance. The musicians were asked to fill out a questionnaire immediately after a concert. Flow experience during the performance was measured using the Flow Short Scale. The Performance-specific Questionnaire on MPA (PQM) was used for MPA. The PQM addresses particular aspects of MPA and refers retrospectively to the time before and during the performance as well as to the moment of filling out the questionnaire after the performance. Using three scales, the functional coping, the perceived symptoms of MPA and self-efficacy were determined for each time point of the performance. The results showed that experiencing flow was on average higher among orchestral musicians compared to a sample of the general population. However, there were differences between the professional and non-professional musicians. All PQM scales showed significant correlations with the global flow scale. Regression analysis on the global flow score found that regarding the time before the performance the PQM scale symptoms of MPA were diametrically connected with the flow experience. The PQM scale functional coping was shown to be positively related to the flow during the performance. Moreover, high self-efficacy was found to be closely related with stronger flow experience. Furthermore, flow seems to have positive effects on functionally coping with MPA and the self-efficacy after the performance. These findings confirm the negative relationship between flow and symptoms of MPA, offering further approaches in understanding the relationship especially for live music performances.

Background Language barriers (LB) are common in patient care. They can negatively impact the quality of care, and increase costs. LB can be overcome by using interpreters. However, collaboration with interpreters is a professional activity which can and needs to be learnt. Interpret2Improve is an innovative educational intervention where medical and nursing students learn together how to address LB and effectively collaborate with interpreters. Methods The three-hour course has two parts: After a short introduction on the relevance of LB and resulting issues of patient safety etc., students in interprofessional teams of two practice conversations with non-German-speaking simulated patients and professional interpreters. The course is evaluated in a pre-post format with the Freiburg Questionnaire for Interprofessional Learning Evaluation which has been validated in prior studies. Results Fifty-one students (thirty of the participants were medical students, 21 participants were students in nursing care) participated from 11/2016–07/2018. Overall, the course was very well received (mean 1.73 (SD 0.85) on a five point scale: 1 = very good, 5 = insufficient). The evaluation by medical and nursing students differed significantly. Fourteen out of twenty-one items show a self-assessed increase in interprofessional knowledge or skills. Conclusions Students felt that their skills in addressing LB by effectively collaborating with interpreters increased during this interprofessional format. Further studies are needed to obtain further evidence beyond self-assessment and regarding the long-term outcomes.

Background: Language barriers (LB) are common in patient care. They can negatively impact the quality of care, and increase costs. LB can be overcome by using interpreters. However, collaboration with interpreters is a professional activity which can and needs to be learnt. Interpret2Improve is an innovative educational intervention where medical and nursing students learn together how to address LB and effectively collaborate with interpreters.Methods: The three-hour course has two parts: After a short introduction on the relevance of LB and resulting issues of patient safety etc., students in interprofessional teams of two practice conversations with non-German-speaking simulated patients and professional interpreters. The course is evaluated in a pre-post format with the Freiburg Questionnaire for Interprofessional Learning Evaluation which has been validated in prior studies. Results: 51 students (thirty of the participants were medical students, 21 participants were students in nursing care) participated from 11/2016–07/2018. Overall, the course was very well received (mean 1.73 (SD 0,85) on a five point scale: 1= very good, 5=insufficient). The evaluation by medical and nursing students differed significantly. 14 out of 21 items show a self-assessed increase in interprofessional knowledge or skills. Conclusions: Students felt that their skills in adressing LB by effectively collaborating with interpreters increased during this interprofessional format. Further studies are needed to obtain further evidence beyond self-assessment and regarding the longterm outcomes.