Article

Teaching While Learning While Practicing: Reframing Faculty Development for the Patient-Centered Medical Home

Dr. Clay is staff physician, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, and clinical assistant professor, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, both in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Dr. Sikon is chair, Department of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic, and associate professor of medicine, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, both in Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Lypson is assistant dean for graduate medical education and professor of internal medicine and medical education, University of Michigan Medical School, and staff physician, VA Ann Arbor Health Care System, both in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Dr. Gomez is professor of clinical medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California. Dr. Kennedy-Malone is professor of nursing, School of Nursing at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, North Carolina. Dr. Bussey-Jones is associate professor of medicine and staff member, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Bowen is professor of medicine, Oregon Health & Sciences University School of Medicine, Portland, Oregon, and education consultant, Veterans Health Administration Office of Academic Affiliations, Washington, DC.
Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges (Impact Factor: 3.47). 07/2013; 88(9). DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31829ecf89
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Soaring costs of health care, patients living longer with chronic illnesses, and continued attrition of interest in primary care contribute to the urgency of developing an improved model of health care delivery. Out of this need, the concept of the team-based, patient-centered medical home (PCMH) has developed. Amidst implementation in academic settings, clinical teachers face complex challenges not previously encountered: teaching while simultaneously learning about the PCMH model, redesigning clinical delivery systems while simultaneously delivering care within them, and working more closely in expanded interprofessional teams.To address these challenges, the authors reviewed three existing faculty development models and recommended four important adaptations for preparing clinical teachers for their roles as system change agents and facilitators of learning in these new settings. First, many faculty find themselves in the awkward position of teaching concepts they have yet to master themselves. Professional development programs must recognize that, at least initially, health professions learners and faculty will be learning system redesign content and skills together while practicing in the evolving workplace. Second, all care delivery team members influence learning in the workplace. Thus, the definition of faculty must expand to include nurses, pharmacists, social workers, medical assistants, patients, and others. These team members will need to accept their roles as educators. Third, learning to deliver health care in teams will require support of both interprofessional collaboration and intraprofessional identity development. Fourth, learning to manage change and uncertainty should be part of the core content of any faculty development program within the PCMH.

1 Follower
 · 
81 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Primary Care reform in Canada and globally has encouraged the development of interprofessional primary care initiatives. This has led to significant involvement of non-physician Health Care Providers (NPHCPs) in the teaching of medical trainees. The objective of this study was to understand the experiences, supports and challenges facing non-physician health care providers in Family Medicine education. Four focus groups were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide with twenty one NPHCPs involved in teaching at the University of Toronto, Department of Family & Community Medicine. The focus groups were transcribed and analyzed for recurrent themes. The multi-disciplinary research team held several meetings to discuss themes. NPHCPs were highly involved in Family Medicine education, formally and informally. NPHCPs felt valued as teachers, but this often did not occur until after learners understood their educator role through increased time and exposure. NPHCPs expressed a lack of advance information of learner knowledge level and expectations, and missed opportunities to give feedback or receive teaching evaluations. Adequate preparation time, teaching space and financial compensation were important to NPHCPs, yet were often lacking. There was low awareness but high interest in faculty status and professional development opportunities. Sharing learner goals and objectives and offering NPHCPs feedback and evaluation would help to formalize NPHCP roles and optimize their capacity for cross-professional teaching. Preparation time and dedicated space for teaching are also necessary. NPHCPs should be encouraged to pursue faculty appointments and to access ongoing Professional Development opportunities.
    BMC Medical Education 12/2015; 15(1):283. DOI:10.1186/s12909-015-0283-8 · 1.41 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: These are historic times for family medicine. The profession is moving beyond the visionary blueprint of the Future of Family Medicine (FFM) report while working to harness the momentum created by the FFM movement. Preparing for, and leading through, the next transformative wave of change (FFM version 2.0) will require the engagement of multigenerational and multidisciplinary visionaries who bring wisdom from diverse experiences. Active group reflection on the past will potentiate the collective work being done to best chart the future. Historical competency is critically important for family medicine's future. This article describes the historical context of the development and launch of the FFM report, emphasizing the professional activism that preceded and followed it. This article is intended to spark intergenerational dialog by providing a multigenerational reflection on the history of FFM and the evolution that has occurred in family medicine over the past decade. Such intergenerational conversations enable our elders to share wisdom with our youth, while allowing our discipline to visualize history through the eyes of future generations.
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 11/2014; 27(6):839-845. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2014.06.140085 · 1.85 Impact Factor
  • Academic pediatrics 05/2014; 14(3):221-4. DOI:10.1016/j.acap.2014.02.013 · 2.23 Impact Factor