错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Tumor board simulation improves interdisciplinary decision-making in medical students

  • Kevin Fink,
  • Marie Forster,
  • Matthias Oettle,
  • Marcel Büttner,
  • Chukwuka Eze,
  • Lukas Käsmann,
  • Amanda Tufman,
  • Diego Kauffmann-Guerrero,
  • Toki A. Bolt,
  • Julia Kovacs,
  • Jens Neumann,
  • Johannes Mücke,
  • Sonja Heuser,
  • Stefanie Corradini,
  • Franziska Walter,
  • Maximilian Niyazi,
  • Claus Belka,
  • Martin Dreyling,
  • Martin R. Fischer,
  • Daniel F. Fleischmann

摘要

Introduction

Training of interdisciplinary clinical reasoning and decision-making skills, essential in daily clinical practice in oncological specialties, are still underrepresented in medical education. Therefore, at LMU University Hospital Munich, we implemented a didactically modified tumor board simulation with experts from five different disciplines (medical oncology, pathology, radiation oncology, radiology, and surgery) presenting patient cases into a one-week course on the basic principles of oncology. In this survey, we examined the self-assessed impact of our course on the interdisciplinary decision-making skills of medical students.

Methods

Between November-December 2023 and January-February 2024, we surveyed two cohorts of medical students in the third year of medical school in our one-week course before and after participating in the tumor board simulation. The objective was to evaluate the self-assessed knowledge in interdisciplinary clinical decision-making, in integrating ethical considerations into clinical reasoning, and in comprehension of various professional viewpoints in interdisciplinary decision-making. Knowledge was assessed using a five-step Likert scale from 1 (no knowledge) to 5 (complete knowledge).

Results

The survey was answered by 76 students before and 55 after the simulation, equaling 60–70% of all 100 course participants. Mean knowledge level regarding principles of interdisciplinary clinical decision-making improved significantly in all of the following exemplary aspects: purpose and procedure of tumor boards in clinical practice (from 2.4 ± 1.1 to 4.0 ± 1.0, Spearman’s ρ = 0.6, p < 0.001), principles of dealing with ethical challenges in oncology (from 2.4 ± 1.1 to 3.4 ± 1.0, ρ = 0.4, p < 0.001), and principles of shared decision-making in oncology (2.7 ± 1.1 to 3.7 ± 1.0, ρ = 0.4, p < 0.001). Students reported that their skills in clinical decision-making and ability to discuss oncological patient cases from different professional viewpoints improved due to the teaching course.

Conclusion

By employing our interdisciplinary one-week course and a didactically modified tumor board simulation featuring experts from various oncological disciplines, medical students’ comprehension of interdisciplinary clinical decision-making in oncology improved significantly.