Ethnicity and the prostate cancer experience: a qualitative metasynthesis

Ethical reasoning through simulation: a phenomenological analysis of student experience

Background
Medical students transitioning into professional practice feel underprepared to deal with the emotional complexities of real-life ethical situations. Simulation-based learning (SBL) may provide a safe environment for students to probe the boundaries of ethical encounters. Published studies of ethics simulation have not generated sufficiently deep accounts of student experience to inform pedagogy. The aim of this study was to understand students’ lived experiences as they engaged with the emotional challenges of managing clinical ethical dilemmas within a SBL environment.

Methods
This qualitative study was underpinned by an interpretivist epistemology. Eight senior medical students participated in an interprofessional ward-based SBL activity incorporating a series of ethically challenging encounters. Each student wore digital video glasses to capture point-of-view (PoV) film footage. Students were interviewed immediately after the simulation and the PoV footage played back to them. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. An interpretative phenomenological approach, using an established template analysis approach, was used to iteratively analyse the data.

Results
Four main themes emerged from the analysis: (1) ‘Authentic on all levels?’, (2)‘Letting the emotions flow’, (3) ‘Ethical alarm bells’ and (4) ‘Voices of children and ghosts’. Students recognised many explicit ethical dilemmas during the SBL activity but had difficulty navigating more subtle ethical and professional boundaries. In emotionally complex situations, instances of moral compromise were observed (such as telling an untruth). Some participants felt unable to raise concerns or challenge unethical behaviour within the scenarios due to prior negative undergraduate experiences.

Conclusions
This study provided deep insights into medical students’ immersive and embodied experiences of ethical reasoning during an authentic SBL activity. By layering on the human dimensions of ethical decision-making, students can understand their personal responses to emotion, complexity and interprofessional working. This could assist them in framing and observing appropriate ethical and professional boundaries and help smooth the transition into clinical practice.

Complexity of risk: Mixed methods approach to understanding youth risk and insecurity in post-conflict settings

In settings of intergroup conflict, identifying contextually-relevant risk factors for youth development in an important task. In Vukovar, Croatia, a city devastated during the war in former Yugoslavia, ethno-political tensions remain. The current study utilized a mixed method approach to identify two salient community-level risk factors (ethnic tension and general antisocial behavior) and related emotional insecurity responses (ethnic and non-ethnic insecurity) among youth in Vukovar. In Study 1, focus group discussions (N=66) with mother, fathers, and adolescents 11 to 15-years-old were analyzed using the Constant Comparative Method, revealing two types of risk and insecurity responses. In Study 2, youth (N=227, 58% male, M=15.88 SD=1.12 years old) responded to quantitative scales developed from the focus groups; discriminate validity was demonstrated and path analyses established predictive validity between each type of risk and insecurity. First, community ethnic tension (i.e., threats related to war/ethnic identity) significantly predicted ethnic insecurity for all youth (β=.41, p<.001). Second, experience with community antisocial behavior (i.e., general crime found in any context) predicted non-ethnic community insecurity for girls (β=.32, p<.05), but not for boys. These findings are the first to show multiple forms of emotional insecurity at the community level; implications for future research are discussed.

Situation Background Assessment Recommendation (SBAR): Undergraduate Perspectives

Situation Background Assessment and Recommendation (SBAR): Undergraduate Perspectives C Morgan, L Adams, J Murray, R Dunlop, IK Walsh. Ian K Walsh, Centre for Medical Education, Queen’s University Belfast, Mulhouse Building, Royal Victoria Hospital, Grosvenor Road, Belfast BT12 6DP Background and Purpose: Structured communication tools are used to improve team communication quality.1,2 The Situation Background Assessment and Recommendation (SBAR) tool is widely adopted within patient safety.3 SBAR effectiveness is reportedly equivocal, suggesting use is not sustained beyond initial training.4-6 Understanding perspectives of those using SBAR may further improve clinical communication. We investigated senior medical undergraduate perspectives on SBAR, particularly when communicating with senior colleagues. Methodology: Mixed methods data collection was used. A previously piloted questionnaire with 12 five point Lickert scale questions and 3 open questions was given to all final year medical students. A subgroup also participated in 10 focus groups, deploying strictly structured audio-recorded questions. Selection was by convenience sampling, data gathered by open text questions and comments transcribed verbatim. In-vivo coding (iterative, towards data saturation) preceded thematic analysis. Results: 233 of 255 students (91%) completed the survey. 1. There were clearly contradictory viewpoints on SBAR usage. A recurrent theme was a desire for formal feedback and a relative lack of practice/experience with SBAR. 2. Students reported SBAR as having variable interpretation between individuals; limiting use as a shared mental model. 3. Brief training sessions are insufficient to embed the tool. 4. Most students reported SBAR helping effective communication, especially by providing structure in stressful situations. 5. Only 18.5% of students felt an alternative resource might be needed. Sub analysis of the themes highlighted: A. Lack of clarity regarding what information to include and information placement within the acronym, B. Senior colleague negative response to SBAR C. Lack of conciseness with the tool. Discussion and Conclusions: Despite a wide range of contradictory interpretation of SBAR utility, most students wish to retain the resource. More practice opportunities/feedback may enhance user confidence and understanding. References: (1) Leonard M, Graham S, Bonacum D. The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care. Quality & Safety in Health Care 2004 Oct;13(Suppl 1):85-90. (2) d'Agincourt-Canning LG, Kissoon N, Singal M, Pitfield AF. Culture, communication and safety: lessons from the airline industry. Indian J Pediatr 2011 Jun;78(6):703-708. (3) Dunsford J. Structured communication: improving patient safety with SBAR. Nurs Womens Health 2009 Oct;13(5):384-390. (4) Compton J, Copeland K, Flanders S, Cassity C, Spetman M, Xiao Y, et al. Implementing SBAR across a large multihospital health system. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2012 Jun;38(6):261-268. (5) Ludikhuize J, de Jonge E, Goossens A. Measuring adherence among nurses one year after training in applying the Modified Early Warning Score and Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation instruments. Resuscitation 2011 Nov;82(11):1428-1433. (6) Cunningham NJ, Weiland TJ, van Dijk J, Paddle P, Shilkofski N, Cunningham NY. Telephone referrals by junior doctors: a randomised controlled trial assessing the impact of SBAR in a simulated setting. Postgrad Med J 2012 Nov;88(1045):619-626.

Ethnicity and the prostate cancer experience: a qualitative metasynthesis

Objectives: To summarise black and minority ethnic (BME) patients' and partners
experiences of prostate cancer (PCa) by examining the findings of existing qualitative studies
Methods:
We undertook a systematic metasynthesis of qualitative studies using a modified version of
Noblit and Hare's 'meta-ethnography' approach, with a 2000-2015 search of seven databases.
Results: Thirteen studies of men from US and UK BME groups were included. We explored
constructs with BME-specific features. Healthcare provider relationships, formation of a
spiritual alliance with God (which enhanced the participants’ feeling of empowerment and
ability to cope with the cancer) and living on for others (generally to increase cancer
awareness), often connected to spiritual regrowth, were the three constructs most commonly
reported. A magnified effect from erectile dysfunction was also common. Initially this
affected men’s disclosure to others about their cancer and their sexual problems, but
eventually men responded by shifting their conceptualisations of masculinity to sustain self
and social identities. There was also evidence of inequality resulting from financial
constraints and adversity that necessitated resilience in coping.
Conclusions: The prostate cancer experience of BME men and their partners is affected by a
complex intersection of ethnicity with other factors. Healthcare services should acknowledge
this. If providers recognise the men’s felt masculinities, social identities and spiritual beliefs
and their shifting nature, services could be improved, with community as well as individual
benefits. More studies are needed in diverse ethnic groups