IntroductionThis study examines the emergency department (ED) waiting room (WR) population’s knowledge about the ED process and hospital function and explores the types of educational materials that might appeal to patients and their companions in an ED waiting room. Our goal was to identify potential high-impact opportunities for patient education.MethodsA 32-question survey about demographics, usage of primary care physicians (PCP), understanding of the ED and triage process, desire to know about delays, health education and understanding of teaching hospitals was offered to all qualified individuals.ResultsFive hundred and forty-four surveys were returned. Fifty-five percent reported having a PCP, of which 53% (29% of all WR patients) called a PCP prior to coming to the ED. It was found that 51.2% can define triage; 51% as an acuity assessment and 17% as a vital signs check. Sixty-nine percent knew why patients were seen according to triage priority. Seventy-two percent wanted to know about delays, yet only 25% wanted to know others’ wait times. People wanted updates every 41 minutes and only three percent wanted a physician to do this. Forty-one percent wanted information on how the ED functions, 60% via handouts and 43% via video. Information on updates and common medical emergencies is significantly more important than material on common illnesses, finding a PCP, or ED function (p<0.05). Median estimated time for medical workup ranged from 35 minutes for radiographs, to one hour for lab results, computed tomography, specialist consult, and admission. Sixty-nine percent knew the definition of a teaching hospital and of those, 87% knew they were at a teaching hospital. Subgroup analysis between racial groups showed significantly reduced knowledge of the definitions of triage and teaching hospitals and significantly increased desire for information on ED function in minority groups (p<0.05).ConclusionThe major findings in this study were that many visitors would like handouts about ED function and medical emergencies over other topics. Additionally, the knowledge of functions such as triage and teaching hospitals were 70% and 69%, respectively. This was reduced in non-Caucasian ethnicities, while there was an increased desire for information on ED function relative to Caucasians. This research suggests increasing updates and educational materials in the waiting room could impact the waiting room and overall hospital experience.

BackgroundAbortion services will be sought by an estimated one in three US women before they reach age 45. Despite the importance of family planning (FP) care, many medical schools do not currently offer formal education in this area, and students are unable to meet associated competency standards prior to graduation.PurposeThe purpose of this study was to explore students’ motivations in pursuing FP electives throughout the United States, their experiences during these courses, and any impact of these rotations on their plans for future practice. MethodWe conducted a qualitative study consisting of semi-structured interviews with medical students upon completing fourth-year FP electives at US medical schools. Thirty-seven LCME-accredited US medical schools offered fourth-year FP electives. Course directors at 21 of these institutions recruited study participants between June 2012 and June 2013. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed with ATLAS/ti software to identify salient themes.ResultsWe interviewed 29 students representing 14 institutions from all regions of the United States (East Coast, Midwest, South, and West Coast). Five central themes emerged. Medical students are using FP electives to fill gaps in the standard curriculum. Elective participation did not change students’ pre-elective stance on abortion. Many students intend to provide abortion in the future but identified possible limiting factors. Proficiency in contraception and options counseling were top competencies desired and gained. Students reported excellent satisfaction with FP electives and would recommend it to their peers, regardless of their personal beliefs.ConclusionsInterview data revealed that students are using FP electives to fill gaps within preclinical and clinical medical school curriculum. Future physicians will be unable to provide comprehensive care for their female patients if they are not provided with this education. Research should be directed at development and analysis of comprehensive FP curricula, which will allow students to obtain the knowledge necessary to best care for their patients.

There has been a lack of empirical information regarding anatomy education for occupational therapists (OTs). Insufficient anatomy education can result in underprepared entry-level OTs, who may then produce increased practice errors and reduced patient care. The objective of this study was to investigate how human gross anatomy was taught in entry-level occupational therapy programs throughout the United States and evaluate faculty perspectives on its teaching. A mixed-methods survey was sent to the directors of entry-level occupational therapy programs in the United States. Survey responses were compiled to best represent the current occupational therapy education environment. Ten of sixty-eight participating programs did not teach anatomy as a part of their standard occupational therapy curriculum. Of the programs that featured entry-level occupational therapy anatomy courses, the majority were taught by either a non-clinician anatomist or an OT without specialized anatomy training in a region-based, standalone anatomy course during the first semester. In most programs, anatomy was taught to only occupational therapy students using lecture, models/plastination, and/or prosection. Teaching tools, methods, faculty, and programmatic factors were perceived as contributing to program strengths. The design, resources, and faculty involved in the occupational therapy anatomy course may negatively impact the perceived quality of an occupational therapy anatomy program and its students. Participants identified several consequences of insufficient anatomy preparedness, including academic, clinical reasoning, treatment skills, patient care, and professional identity concerns. Occupational therapy educators may want to be aware of the current climate of occupational therapy anatomy education in the United States when designing entry-level occupational therapy anatomy curricula.

Healthcare professionals require strong clinical communication skills (CCS), yet many healthcare workers demonstrate discrepancies between their self‐rated competency in communication skills and patient satisfaction. These communication skill deficiencies may cause increased stress and anxiety in healthcare professionals, which in turn adversely affects patient compliance and long‐term health outcomes. According to the Transaction Model of Communication, communication can be shaped by social, relational, and cultural contexts. This study sought to identify the factors that influence how medical students gained CCS and how those factors evolved over the course of the medical school experience. Semi‐structured interviews of third‐ and fourth‐year medical students were conducted at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Qualitative responses underwent deductive thematic analysis using the Transaction Model of Communication with iterative open coding to identity and name themes. Results indicated that students felt there were profound differences in CCS training between the preclinical versus clinical years. They suggested preclinical CCS training, while valuable, often falls short in preparing them for the challenges of navigating real patient care. Medical students also recognized the value of CCS for safe and effective healthcare practice, but strongly advocated for changes to the current CCS curriculum, including earlier exposure to real patients, increased cultural awareness training, explicit telehealth training, and increased opportunities to practice “delivering bad news”, even in simulated settings. The findings of this study have provided new insights into the individual medical student experience, which speak to the experiences of medical students and practitioners throughout the global healthcare field. This study’s findings may be used to inform curricular changes such as increased training on select topics and earlier access to real patient experiences, which may improve students’ confidence and competency in their clinical communication abilities, thereby improving patient care.

A 2019 study conducted by Robertson et al. suggested that the amount of prior anatomy experience does not predict the performance of first‐year medical students in medical gross anatomy at the University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMMC). In recent years, it has not been possible for UMMC to accept non‐state residents to its medical program. Thus, nearly seventy‐five percent of first‐year medical students matriculate from one of five major in‐state institutions. At current writing, four of the five schools directly communicate with the UMMC admissions program regarding the relationship between their courses and UMMC’s specific institutional mission. First‐year students enter UMMC with a wide range of previous undergraduate and graduate degrees. The undergraduate choices investigated were which institution(s) students attended, what type and how many degree(s) they attained, and whether they took an anatomy course prior to attending UMMC. We hypothesized 1) that undergraduate degree does not predict performance in a medical gross anatomy course, 2) individuals with science majors are more likely to have prior anatomy experience, 3) the collaboration of the previous institution with UMMC does not predict performance in a medical gross anatomy course, and 4) students from Mississippi College who have prior anatomy experience will perform better in the medical gross course at UMMC. Mississippi College implements a gross anatomy curriculum that is nearly identical to the course taught at UMMC. Data was collected from 280 first‐year medical students at UMMC in the fall of 2016 and fall of 2017. Using a self‐reported survey, data was collected on the number and type of prior degrees and prior anatomy experience. The course director provided student performance data in the medical gross anatomy course. The office of admissions of the medical school confirmed the prior degrees and previous academic institutions of the students. Quantitative analysis was used to determine the validity of the research hypotheses. The results of this study could provide additional guidance to undergraduate students during the degree selection process prior to applying to medical school.