The efficacy of intensive biopsychosocial teaching programs for residents |
| |
Authors: | Dr Robert C Smith MD Alicia A Marshall PhD Steven A Cohen-Cole MD |
| |
Affiliation: | (1) B306 Clinical Center, Department of Medicine, Michigan State University, 48824 East Lansing, MI;(2) the Departments of Medicine, Psychiatry, and Communication, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine and College of Communication Arts and Sciences, East Lansing, Michigan;(3) the Department of Psychiatry, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia |
| |
Abstract: | Objective: To review research evaluations of intensive biopsychosocial training programs for nonpsychiatry residents, and determine
whether this research showed sufficient rigor and consistent beneficial impact to allow initial research-based teaching guidelines.
Data sources: An English-language literature search used MEDLINE (1966–93), Psychological Abstracts (1967–93), and Educational Resource
Information Clearinghouse (1966–93) as well as bibliographic reviews from prominent peer-reviewed articles and consultation
with an expert.
Study selection: From among several hundred articles about biopsychosocial training, only 12 studies met the selection criteria: at least
100 contact hours of training for nonpsychiatry residents and an evaluation of efficacy.
Data extraction: The three authors independently assessed these 12 studies and made a consensus decision based on explicit criteria. Successful
and unsuccessful programs were distinguished from among those classified as quasi-experimental or experimental to identify
programs of sufficient rigor to meet the study objective; success was defined as learning beyond knowledge and residents’
acceptance of teaching.
Data synthesis: Four successful quasi-experimental or experimental programs showed the following uniquely beneficial features: 1) protected
time for residents; 2) teaching that was required, structured, multidimensional, and balanced between learner-centered and
teacher-centered approaches; 3) teaching methods that used normal as well as psychosocially disturbed patients, nonpsychiatrist
teachers, and special teaching techniques; and 4) inclusion in the curriculum of interviewing, interpersonal skills, doctor-patient
relationship, and patient education. Two unsuccessful quasi-experimental or experimental programs were unidimensional and
unstructured, and used predominant or isolated teacher-centered approaches. Features found in both successful and unsuccessful
programs were experiential teaching, psychiatrist and other mental health professional teachers, use of disturbed patients,
training to manage patients’ psychosocial problems, teaching directed toward knowledge acquisition, teaching about treatment,
and university affiliation.
Conclusions: Four rigorously studied, successful programs showed a common pattern of intensive biopsychosocial teaching that produced,
in aggregate, improvement in residents’ knowledge, attitudes, skills, and self-awareness. Although there is need for more
definitive research, these data are sufficiently compelling and consistent to provide initial, research-based teaching guidelines. |
| |
Keywords: | biopsychosocial model biopsychosocial teaching psychosocial teaching residency guidelines literature review teaching |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|