PurposeMentoring is considered a valuable component of undergraduate medical education with a variety of programs at established medical schools. This study presents how new medical schools have set up mentoring programs as they have developed their curricula.MethodsAdministrators from 14 US medical schools established since 2006 were surveyed regarding the structure and implementation of their mentoring programs.ResultsThe majority of new medical schools had mentoring programs that varied in structure and implementation. Although the programs were viewed as valuable at each institution, challenges when creating and implementing mentoring programs in new medical schools included time constraints for faculty and students, and lack of financial and professional incentives for faculty.ConclusionsSimilar to established medical schools, there was little uniformity among mentoring programs at new medical schools, likely reflecting differences in curriculum and program goals. Outcome measures are needed to determine whether a best practice for mentoring can be established.

The findings suggest that there is a need for increased rigor in reporting research involving SPs. In order to support the validity of research findings, journal editors, reviewers and authors are encouraged to provide adequate detail when describing SP methodology.

Background Effective communication skills for clinical practice are essential for all advanced practice nurses. However, competence in these skills is not necessarily intuitive. Advanced communication skills should be taught in a way that is similar to the way other psychomotor skills in advanced nursing practice programs are taught. Objectives To develop a patient communication simulation laboratory for the acute care nurse practitioner program at a major university and to evaluate students’ perceived confidence and communication effectiveness before and immediately as well as 4 months after completion of the laboratory. Methods The communication simulation laboratory was developed in collaboration with faculty from the schools of nursing and medicine. Students participated in a didactic session and then completed a 2-hour communication simulation in the laboratory. Content and simulation concentrated on breaking “bad news,” empathetic communication, motivational interviewing, and the “angry” patient. Students’ self-reported confidence and perceived skill in communication were measured via a Likert scale before, immediately after, and 4 months after completion of the laboratory simulation. Students also evaluated the experience by responding to open-ended questions. Results Compared with baseline findings (before the lecture and simulation), students’ confidence in initiating difficult conversations increased significantly both immediately (P<.001) and 4 months after (P=.001) the laboratory simulation. Students’ self-ratings of overall ability to communicate were also significantly greater immediately (P<.001) and 4 months (P=.001) after the simulation. Overall, students rated the laboratory simulation experience highly beneficial. Conclusions The content and methods used for the simulation improved students’ confidence and perceived skill in communication in potentially difficult acute care situations.

This methodology has widespread application to other areas of cancer nursing including nurses with less oncology experience and practicing nurses on the oncology units. In addition, there is application throughout nursing curriculum for undergraduate and graduate programs. The content should be presented earlier in the curriculum and then reinforced throughout the remaining courses with clinical follow-up.