Piloting a patient safety and quality improvement co-curriculum

  • Kroker-Bode C
  • Whicker S
  • Pline E
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Despite the push for resident and faculty involvement in patient safety (PS) and quality improvement (QI), there is limited literature describing programs that train them to conduct PS/QI projects. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of a co-learning PS/QI curriculum. Method: The authors implemented a co-learning (residents and faculty together) PS/QI curriculum within our general Internal Medicine program over 1 year. The curriculum consisted of two workshops, between-session guidance, and final presentation. The authors evaluated effectiveness by self-assessment of attitude, knowledge, and behavior change and PS/QI project completion. Results: Thirty-eight of 32 (95%) resident and 8 faculty member participants attended the workshops and 27 of 40 (67%) completed the evaluation. Participants (87-96%) responded favorably regarding workshop effectiveness. The authors found significant improvement in 78% of items pertaining to PS/QI knowledge/skills, but no difference for attitudinal items. The final project evaluation participants rated project content as relevant to learning needs (75%); training as well-organized (75%); faculty mentorship for the project as supportive (75%); and the overall project as excellent or very good (71%). Conclusion: The authors successfully demonstrated a framework for co-teaching faculty and residents to conduct PS/QI projects. Participants acquired necessary tools to practice in an ever-evolving clinical setting emphasizing a patient-centered and quality-focused environment. ARTICLE HISTORY

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kroker-Bode, C., Whicker, S. A., Pline, E. R., Morgan, T., Gazo, J., Rudd, M., & Musick, D. W. (2017). Piloting a patient safety and quality improvement co-curriculum. Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives, 7(6), 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/20009666.2017.1403830

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free