Advertisement

Patients and Surgical Education: Rethinking Learning, Practice and Patient Engagement

  • Rosamund Snow
  • Margaret BearmanEmail author
  • Rick Iedema
Chapter
Part of the Innovation and Change in Professional Education book series (ICPE, volume 17)

Overview

Patient involvement offers many opportunities for surgical education. This chapter presents ideas and examples to stimulate new ways of designing educational experiences. Patient involvement in medical education is presented as more than storytelling; it is how patients can be active teachers, curriculum developers and assessors. Involving patients may change surgical education and even surgical practice. In particular, patient involvement may shift (1) where the lesson starts and ends, (2) who decides what ‘good’ looks like, (3) what skills need to be learnt, (4) the role of the patient and (5) how to provide a good surgical service.

Keywords

Patient involvement Patient voice Surgical education Medical education 

References

  1. 1.
    Jha, V., Quinton, N. D., Bekker, H. L., & Roberts, T. E. (2009). Strategies and interventions for the involvement of real patients in medical education: A systematic review. Medical Education, 43(1), 10–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Towle, A., Farrell, C., Gaines, M. E., Godolphin, W., John, G., Kline, C., et al. (2016). The patient’s voice in health and social care professional education: The Vancouver statement. International Journal of Health Governance, 21(1), 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ruitenberg, C. W., & Towle, A. (2015). “How to do things with words” in health professions education. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 20(4), 857–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McKeown, M., Malihi-Shoja, L., Hogarth, R., Jones, F., Holt, K., Sullivan, P., et al. (2012). The value of involvement from the perspective of service users and carers engaged in practitioner education: Not just a cash nexus. Nurse Education Today, 32(2), 178–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lauckner, H., Doucet, S., & Wells, S. (2012). Patients as educators: The challenges and benefits of sharing experiences with students. Medical Education, 46(10), 992–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nestel, D., & Bentley, L. (2011). The role of patients in surgical education. In H. Fry & R. Kneebone (Eds.), Surgical education: Theorising an emerging domain (pp. 151–168). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Towle, A., Bainbridge, L., Godolphin, W., Katz, A., Kline, C., Lown, B., et al. (2010). Active patient involvement in the education of health professionals. Medical Education, 44(1), 64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Patient engagement in patient safety: A framework for the NHS. National Health Service England. 2016.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mulsow, J. J. W., Feeley, T. M., & Tierney, S. (2012). Beyond consent—Improving understanding in surgical patients. The American Journal of Surgery, 203(1), 112–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Misra, S., & Oliver, N. S. (2015). Diabetic ketoacidosis in adults. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 351, 1.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Patient and public involvement in undergraduate medical education. UK: General Medical Council. 2009.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jha, V., Setna, Z., Al-Hity, A., Quinton, N. D., & Roberts, T. E. (2010). Patient involvement in teaching and assessing intimate examination skills: A systematic review. Medical Education, 44(4), 347–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Riem, N., Boet, S., Bould, M. D., Tavares, W., & Naik, V. N. (2012). Do technical skills correlate with non-technical skills in crisis resource management: A simulation study. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 109, 723–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kneebone, R., Nestel, D., Yadollahi, F., Brown, R., Nolan, C., Durack, J., et al. (2006). Assessing procedural skills in context: Exploring the feasibility of an integrated procedural performance instrument (IPPI). Medical Education, 40(11), 1105–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Research in Assessment and Digital Learning (CRADLE)Deakin UniversityGeelongAustralia
  2. 2.Centre for Team Based Practice & Learning in Health CareKing’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations