Till Örebro universitet

BACKGROUND: Leadership is widely recognized as essential for fostering collaborative healthcare teams and improving patient outcomes. However, there is limited research on how leadership supports the development of nonclinical skills in healthcare settings in many low- and middle-income countries, including those in the Balkan region. This study addresses that gap by examining how leadership roles and practices enhance non-technical skills (NTSs)-such as communication, teamwork, and role clarity-among healthcare workers in the Balkans while also considering sustainable development, organizational values, cultural influences, and social dynamics.

METHODS: A qualitative approach was employed, drawing on data collected from three workshops conducted between 2018 and 2022 in university hospital clinics in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Montenegro. Data sources included observations of group discussions, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews with healthcare leaders. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify patterns and develop key themes.

RESULTS: Four key themes emerged regarding the role of leadership in the development of NTSs: (1) defining roles and responsibilities, (2) fostering communication and teamwork, (3) promoting readiness for change, and (4) developing leadership competencies. The participants noted that clear role definitions enhanced team coordination, inclusive communication reduced misunderstandings, supportive leadership eased resistance to change, and mentorship served as a valuable mechanism for leadership development.

CONCLUSION: Leadership plays a key role in strengthening NTSs in Balkan healthcare contexts by promoting communication and teamwork within culturally and hierarchically complex environments. Role clarity, open dialogue, and shared accountability emerged as key factors for effective team performance and patient safety. These findings highlight the need for leadership development and the implementation of formal training initiatives-such as structured mentorship programs-to foster collaborative and resilient healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Virtual patients (VPs) are computer-based simulations of clinical scenarios used in health professions education to address various learning outcomes, including clinical reasoning (CR). CR is a crucial skill for health care practitioners, and its inadequacy can compromise patient safety. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) and social robots have introduced new possibilities for enhancing VP interactivity and realism. However, their application in VP simulations has been limited, and no studies have investigated the effectiveness of combining LLMs with social robots for CR training.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to explore the potential added value of a social robotic VP platform combined with an LLM compared to a conventional computer-based VP modality for CR training of medical students.

METHODS: A Swedish explorative proof-of-concept study was conducted between May and July 2023, combining quantitative and qualitative methodology. In total, 15 medical students from Karolinska Institutet and an international exchange program completed a VP case in a social robotic platform and a computer-based semilinear platform. Students' self-perceived VP experience focusing on CR training was assessed using a previously developed index, and paired 2-tailed t test was used to compare mean scores (scales from 1 to 5) between the platforms. Moreover, in-depth interviews were conducted with 8 medical students. RESULTS: The social robotic platform was perceived as more authentic (mean 4.5, SD 0.7 vs mean 3.9, SD 0.5; odds ratio [OR] 2.9, 95% CI 0.0-1.0; P=.04) and provided a beneficial overall learning effect (mean 4.4, SD 0.6 versus mean 4.1, SD 0.6; OR 3.7, 95% CI 0.1-0.5; P=.01) compared with the computer-based platform. Qualitative analysis revealed 4 themes, wherein students experienced the social robot as superior to the computer-based platform in training CR, communication, and emotional skills. Limitations related to technical and user-related aspects were identified, and suggestions for improvements included enhanced facial expressions and VP cases simulating multiple personalities.

CONCLUSIONS: A social robotic platform enhanced by an LLM may provide an authentic and engaging learning experience for medical students in the context of VP simulations for training CR. Beyond its limitations, several aspects of potential improvement were identified for the social robotic platform, lending promise for this technology as a means toward the attainment of learning outcomes within medical education curricula.

Virtual patients (VPs) are increasingly used in medical education to train clinical reasoning (CR) skills. However, optimal VP design for enhancing interactivity and authenticity remains unclear. Novel interactive modalities, such as large language model (LLM)-enhanced social robotic VPs might increase interactivity and authenticity in CR skill practice. To evaluate medical students' perceptions of CR training using an LLM-enhanced social robotic VP platform compared with a conventional computer-based VP platform. A qualitative study involved 23 third-year medical students from Karolinska Institutet, who completed VP cases on an LLM-enhanced social robotic platform and a computer-based semi-linear platform. In-depth interviews assessed students' self-perceived acquirement of CR skills using the two platforms. Thematic analysis was employed to identify themes and sub-themes. Three main themes were identified: authenticity, VP application, and strengths and limitations. Students found the social robotic platform more authentic and engaging. It enabled highly interactive communication and expressed emotions, collectively offering a realistic experience. It facilitated active learning, hypothesis generation, and adaptive thinking. Limitations included lack of physical examination options and, occasionally, mechanical dialogue. The LLM-enhanced social robotic VP platform offers a more authentic and interactive learning experience compared to the conventional computer-based platform. Despite some limitations, it shows promise in training CR skills, communication, and adaptive thinking. Social robotic VPs may prove useful and safe learning environments for exposing medical students to diverse, highly interactive patient simulations.

Purpose: To explore how stroke survivors experience and prefer to participate in clinical reasoning processes in the subacute phase of stroke rehabilitation.

Methods: An explorative qualitative design was used. Individual interviews were conducted with 10 stroke survivors (4 women and 6 men, mean age 68 years) 4 weeks after their stroke, and follow-up interviews were conducted with 6 of them after 10 weeks. The interview settings were the patient's home during their home rehabilitation, an inpatient and an outpatient rehabilitation unit. A reflexive thematic analysis was performed.

Results: Four themes were identified: discharge as a critical point for participation, describing a stressful time with varying involvement; supportive actions and context as crucial for participation, describing collaboration with the stroke team, the team's consideration of the stroke survivor's resources and needs, and a supportive home environment; the importance of goals and follow-up, describing goals as motivational and an unstructured use of goals; and difficulties in participation, describing a lack of dialogue with the stroke team and undetected resources and needs.

Conclusions: The stroke survivors experienced changes in their participation in the clinical reasoning process as their rehabilitation progressed. They moved from perceiving themselves as passengers at the time of their hospital discharge to gradually seeing themselves as the driver of their rehabilitation process. Some person-centered attributes, such as respectful relationships and a health focus, were incorporated into the clinical reasoning, while others, such as a holistic view and shared goal-setting, required further emphasis for improved person-centeredness in stroke rehabilitation.

Purpose: The study objective was to investigate how health care providers in stroke teams reason about their clinical reasoning process in collaboration with the patient and next of kin.

Materials and methods: An explorative qualitative design using stimulated recall was employed. Audio-recordings from three rehabilitation dialogs were used as prompts in interviews with the involved staff about their clinical reasoning. A thematic analysis approach was employed.

Results: A main finding was the apparent friction between profession-centered and person-centered clinical reasoning, which was salient in the data. Five themes were identified: the importance of different perspectives for a rich picture and well-informed decisions; shared understanding in analysis and decision-making - good intentions but difficult to achieve; the health care providers' expertise directs the dialog; the context's impact on the rehabilitation dialog; and insights about missed opportunities to grasp the patient perspective and arrive at decisions.

Conclusions: Interprofessional stroke teams consider clinical reasoning as a process valuing patient and next of kin perspectives; however, their professional expertise risks preventing individual needs from surfacing. There is a discrepancy between professionals' intentions for person-centeredness and how clinical reasoning plays out. Stimulated recall can unveil person-centered practice and enhance professionals' awareness of their clinical reasoning.

Educating health care professionals for working in interprofessional teams is a key preparation for roles in modern healthcare. Interprofessional teams require members who are competent in their roles. Self-assessment instruments measuring interprofessional competence (IPC) are widely used in educational preparation, but their ability to accurately and reliably measure competence is unknown. We conducted a systematic review to identify variations in the characteristics and use of self-report instruments measuring IPC. Following a systematic search of electronic databases and after applying eligibility criteria, 38 articles were included that describe 8 IPC self-report instruments. A large variation was found in the extent of coverage of IPC core competencies as articulated by the Interprofessional Education Collaborative. Each instrument's strength of evidence, psychometric performance and uses varied. Rather than measuring competency as "behaviours", they measured indirect proxies for competence, such as attitudes towards core interprofessional competencies. Educators and researchers should identify the most appropriate and highest-performing IPC instruments according to the context in which they will be used.Systematic review registration: Open Science Framework (https://archive.org/details/osf-registrations-vrfjn-v1).

OBJECTIVE: To explore how stroke survivors experience and prefer to participate in clinical reasoning processes in the acute phase of stroke care.

METHODS: An explorative qualitative design was used. Individual interviews were conducted with 11 stroke survivors in the acute phase of care and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS: The analysis identified five themes: What's going on with me?; Being a recipient of care and treatment; The need to be supported to participate; To be seen and strengthened; and Collaboration and joint understanding.

CONCLUSION: Stroke survivors experience many attributes of person-centeredness in the acute phase of care but, according to their stories, their participation in clinical reasoning can be further supported. The tension between surrendering and the desire to be more actively involved in the care needs to be considered to facilitate participation in clinical reasoning.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Stroke survivors' participation in clinical reasoning in the acute phase can be facilitated by health professionals noticing signs prompting a shift towards increased willingness to participate. Furthermore, health professionals need to take an active role, sharing their expertise and inviting the stroke survivors to share their perspective. The findings can contribute to further develop person-centered care in acute settings.

OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aimed to explore and synthesize current literature to advance the understanding of how to design clinical reasoning (CR) curricula for students in health professions education.

METHODS: Arksey and O'Malley's 6-stage framework was applied. Peer-reviewed articles were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and manual searches, resulting in the identification of 2932 studies.

RESULTS: Twenty-six articles were included on CR in medical, nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, midwifery, dentistry, and speech language therapy education. The results describe: features of CR curriculum design; CR theories, models, and frameworks that inform curricula; and teaching content, methods, and assessments that inform CR curricula.

CONCLUSIONS: Several CR theories, teaching, and assessment methods are integrated into CR curricula, reflecting the multidimensionality of CR among professions. Specific CR elements are addressed in several curricula; however, no all-encompassing CR curriculum design has been identified. These findings offer useful insights for educators into how CR can be taught and assessed, but they also suggest the need for further guidance on educational strategies and assessments while learners progress through an educational program.

Clinical reasoning is a complex and crucial ability health professions students need to acquire during their education. Despite its importance, explicit clinical reasoning teaching is not yet implemented in most health professions educational programs. Therefore, we carried out an international and interprofessional project to plan and develop a clinical reasoning curriculum with a train-the-trainer course to support educators in teaching this curriculum to students. We developed a framework and curricular blueprint. Then we created 25 student and 7 train-the-trainer learning units and we piloted 11 of these learning units at our institutions. Learners and faculty reported high satisfaction and they also provided helpful suggestions for improvements. One of the main challenges we faced was the heterogeneous understanding of clinical reasoning within and across professions. However, we learned from each other while discussing these different views and perspectives on clinical reasoning and were able to come to a shared understanding as the basis for developing the curriculum. Our curriculum fills an important gap in the availability of explicit clinical reasoning educational materials both for students and faculty and is unique with having specialists from different countries, schools, and professions. Faculty time and time for teaching clinical reasoning in existing curricula remain important barriers for implementation of clinical reasoning teaching.

Background: Although person-centered care is prioritized in healthcare, challenges remain before such care is integrated in everyday communication and practice. One way to strengthen person-centered care is that health professionals’ clinical reasoning (i.e., assessment and management) is pervaded by patient participation and individualized to patient needs. Interprofessional team meetings, focusing on goals and management planning, is an opportunityt o improve person-centeredness. However, there is a lack of understanding of how person-centeredness is created in the clinical reasoning of teams. This study aims to explore how clinical reasoning is performed from a person-centered perspective in team meetings with patients with stroke and next of kin.

Methods: Explorative qualitative design employing a thematic analysis of audio recorded communication at three team meetings. In total, three patients, two next of kin, and 15 professionals representing eight health professions, participated in the meetings.

Findings: Four themes and eight subthemes were established: a) Emphasizing the patient’s resources; b) Struggling to find a common understanding, including subthemes: Unite the person’s narrative, the relative’s view, and the expertise of the interprofessional team, missed opportunities to clarify patient needs and wishes, and active listening and receptiveness; c) Balancing the patient’s goals and professionals’ goals, including subthemes: Shared goals, the professionals’ view of appropriate goals, and the professionals’ assessment governs achievement of goals; d) Ambiguity in decisions about the management plan, including subthemes: Initiating shared decision making and lack of clarity and consensus.

Discussion: This study reveals how the patient, next of kin and team contribute to shared understanding of the patient’s problem. Goals were guided by the patient’s and professionals’ expertise. To improve person-centeredness in clinical reasoning, the team need to further put the patient’s personal goals and perception of goal-achievement in the forefront as well as improve communication skills to catch patient needs and facilitate shared decisions.