[The following notes were generated by Rebecca Rowe, PhD.]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Spring 2020

Speakers: Jed Gonzalo, MD MSc, Penn State College of Medicine and Stephanie Starr, MD, Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine
Title: “Health Systems Science is the Broccoli of US Medical Education: Tackling the Key Challenges of Implementation”
Series: Evolution and Revolution in Medical Education: Health Systems Sciences

Objectives

• Describe the phases of implementation of HSS in US medical schools
• Identify the “TOP 7” – selected key challenges to HSS education
• Explore three vignettes related to HSS education in US medical schools, with articulation of potential solutions or “take-aways”
• Commit to one action to address challenges at your school

The Phases of Change: Where is your Medical School?

• Exploration Phase – Just beginning to think about HSS
• Decision and Planning Phase – Have decided to incorporate HSS and are now in the planning phase.
• Implementation Phase – We launched! Now What?
• Maintenance and Continuous Improvement Phase – Have been doing this for a while but are still experiences challenges that exist along the continuum.

The “TOP” 7 Challenge Areas for HSS Education (There are many more but these are the top challenges across some of the phases.

Issue 1: The Nomenclature and Language

• The evidence around any one of the 12 different areas of HSS have been around for decades, for example Patient Safety has been around for decades, Quality Improvement has been around for decades as well.
• With this said, the last 7 years have seen all of these areas coalescing into 1 strategic and comprehensive framework.
• The definition that we typically assign to HSS includes “The methods, the processes and the principals involved with improving outcomes, the quality and cost of care of patients of populations within a larger context of systems of care.”
• The nomenclature issues involves some schools stating they may integrate the Social determinants of health or quality care, but these are only two components of HSS. In order to fully integrate HSS in to medical education all 12 components must be integrated.
• This led to a study (Gonzalo, et. al. HSS in Med Ed: Unifying the Components to Catalyze Transformation. Acad Med, 2020) that mapped the 12 different areas of HSS with the different resources, expectancies, competencies, curriculum recommendations that exists and milestones that are used in medical education, that would show and demonstrate the areas of overlap and where there may be gaps across the different components of HSS.
• HSS is not equivalent to some of the finite pieces but is more comprehensive framework balancing all 3 pillars of medical education.

Issue 2: Curriculum Timing, Sequence, Integration

• Includes the total footprint of incorporating HSS
• Lack of consensus of HSS competencies (pieces in AAMC core EPAs, LCME, DC)
• Curriculomegaly – where can we find more space to add content?
• Drip vs bolus method— Drip method where add in several HSS topics into the preexisting system blocks with the basic and clinical sciences. Bolus method have several stand-alone intensive 2 week courses
• Development sequence – what is the right order of business for folks to learn these topics?
• Integrating well with the basic and clinical sciences. Want the students to experience a seamless three science strands across all four years. To be able to do this is a challenge!

Issue 3: Student Perceptions

Adding HSS into existing curricular is not an easy thing to do, especially in the area of student perceptions and student engagement.  In a study that was done prior to implementing HSS into the curriculum to determine the pedagogical challenges, which are the issues that need to be identified before starting the work of adding HSS to make sure you are able to overcome these issues in order to have everyone engaged in your educational program.

Current medical student priorities (includes two pillars of medical science, basic and clinical science) vs alternative medical students priorities that includes the HSS along with basic and clinical sciences.

Current Medical Student                                           Alternative Medical Student

Best Residency Program                                             Best Doctor Possible

Grades and Board Exams        ←AT ODDS→            Patient-Centered Skills

Basic and Clinical Science Courses                            Balance of Basic, Clinical and HSS

• Look at student perceptions of the two-pillar model to medical education to the three pillar approach to medical education. And these two areas are at ODDS.
• In another study (Gonzalo, JD, et. al. Unpacking Medical Students’ Mixed Engagement in HSS. Teach Learn Med, 2019), where a qualitative analysis was done from all of their students’ comments at the end of sessions and courses. These are the themes that emerged:

Issue 4: Faculty Role Modeling and Skills

Comes from the study (Gonzalo, et.al. Concerns and Recommendations for Integrating HSS into Medical Student Education, Acad Med, 2017) that looked at faculty comments and issues shown below:

Importance of Learning HSS

1. “If medical education isn’t broke, don’t fix it.”
2. “HSS is too complex and best learned in residency or practice.”
3. “Early students do not have skills to contribute to health care, and the value added roles already exist.” The roles of medical education is not for the future. The roles of medical education is now and can make a difference today!
4. “Health Systems Science is not yet a true science.”  All of the components of HSS have been around for a while. What is new is bringing them all together in a comprehensive framework. Basic and Clinical Sciences are not enough.

Practical Concerns

1. “There is limited space in an already packed curriculum.” Most of HSS may be already present in our curriculum. It just needs to be relabeled.
2. “Few faculty have the knowledge and skills to teach HSS.”
3. “Accreditation agencies and licensing boards do not support medical education transformation.”
4. “Evolving health systems are not ready to partner with schools with HSS curricula.”

• May be that some of our pre-clinical and clinical faculty are already teaching components of HSS but the topics are not labeled as such.
• May need to develop new educator roles for HSS as documented in the paper by Gonzalo, et. al. New Educator Roles for HSS: Implications for US Medical School Faculty: Acad Med, 2019, where three new or reimagined types of educator roles in HSS were discussed. These are:

1. Classroom or Zoom Instructors
2. Clinical Supervisors or Educators
3. Curriculum leader/evaluator
4. Mentor/advisor (projects, scholarship, career path)

In Summary:

• “New” educators are here.
• Need to advance skills based on education science with attention to learning environments (classroom, online or clinical learning environments).
• Need to acknowledge and reward these roles and work on faculty development.

Issue 5: Assessment of Learners

How do you assess? This is not always an easy thing to do. Start by looking at Miller’s pyramid.

• Learner triangle has four components at the base are cognition and at the top or apex is behavior.
• Base of the triangle is KNOWS: Fact Gathering
• Next level is KNOWS HOW: Interpretation/Application
• These two areas make up ~ 80% of where medical students are.
• Third level is SHOWS: Demonstration of Learning
• Top level or apex is DOES: Performance Integrated into Practice
• Top two levels is where 20% of medical students are.
• The bottom two levels make up the Cognition portion of the triangle and the top two levels make up the Behavior portion of the triangle.
• The percentages are the opinion of Dr. Gonzalo.

Where does HSS appear on the USMLE Board Examinations?

1. Behavioral Health

• • Patient Adherence

2. Epidemiology/Population Health

• • Epidemiology/population health

3. Social Sciences

• • Communication/cultural competence
  • Death/dying and palliative care

4. Systems-Based Practice

• • Complexity/systems thinking
  • Quality improvement
  • Patient safety
  • Health care policy and economics

Content Analysis of HSS Content on NBME USMLE Examinations: (Please note most of this data is anecdotal and should not be quoted!)

• Before 2020 ~7%
• After 2020 estimated that Step 1 and Step 2 would include more HSS ~10-15%
• It is possible that Step 3 could contain as much as 20%.
• What this is showing is HSS is appearing on the Board Exams more frequently.

Issue 6: Clinical Learning Environment

“The learning environment refers to the social interactions, organizational culture and structures, and physical and virtual spaces that surround and shape the learners’ experiences, perceptions, and learning.” (Macy Foundation Conference on the Clinical Learning Environment (Gruppen, Irby, Durning, Maggio, van Schaik)

• Closer gradient of HSS concept knowledge, skills between faculty and learners. Therefore, the students are teaching the faculty, as well as, faculty teaching students
• Practice and education silos
• Practice pressures
• Faculty development
• Insufficient UME structures, processes to ensure reliable ongoing horizontal and vertical integration of HSS

Issue 7: Program Evaluation

This is looking beyond level of the individual learner, but from also the programmatic standpoint.

• Level 1 Reaction: Satisfaction Engagement Relevance (Surveys and Course Evaluations)
• Level 2 Learning: Knowledge, Skills, Attitude Confidence Commitment (NBME HSS Exam Grad. Questionnaire)
• Level 3 Behavior: Application Drivers (Course Assessment, Clinical Assessment, AMA-GME Milestones)
• Level 4 Results: Outcomes Indicators (Patient Outcomes Big Data)

Completed the TOP 7 areas of challenges of the different phases of where institutions might be!

At the end of the Webinar, the speakers took us through a few vignettes from institutions at various stages of bringing HSS into their curriculum that reached out to them for consultation. The title of the vignettes and the specific phase of change are:

Vignette 1: “We’re Thinking about HSS!” – Exploration Phase
Vignette 2: “Our Student Satisfaction Scores are So Low!” – Implementation Phase
Vignette 3: “How Do We Integrate with Our Health System?” – Implementation Phase

Please refer to the archive to listen to the discussion of these vignettes about these implementation challenges.

Lastly, HSS is not just an education framework. It is actually a framework that unifies all health care.

[The following notes were generated by Rebecca Rowe, PhD.]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Spring 2020

Speakers: Luan Lawson, MD, MAEd, Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University and Kelly Caverzagie, MD, University of Nebraska College of Medicine
Title: “Preparing Faculty to Teach Health System Science (HSS) in the Clinical Learning Environment”
Series: Evolution and Revolution in Medical Education: Health Systems Sciences

Objectives

• Highlight opportunities for and challenges to faculty developing the skills necessary to teach HSS.
• Identify the importance of aligning HSS curricula and learning experiences with health systems priorities and initiatives to promote successful HSS curricular outcomes.

What have you learned thus far from the previous Webinars in this series on HSS?

• New professionalism of systems citizens
• Value-added roles for medical students
• Students as change agents

The idea of HSS is not exactly new. It is a study of how health care is delivered, how health care professionals work together to deliver that care and how the health systems can improve patient care and health care delivery. HSS is really innovative and is a comprehensive and holistic framework.

Remember from the HSS framework wheel of patient, family and community, that all of the domains noted are domains that have existed previously within our faculties and health care systems, there are folks that are experts in one of these individual components of the HSS framework. However, having these siloed in the various individual places does not help us with the comprehensive framework for how physicians need to be able to navigate the changing landscape of healthcare and an era in which the only thing that is certain and constant is the change we are undergoing.

What we have noted from the previous Webinars is there is a need for educational change.

• Deficiencies in UME and GME teaching
  • Systems-based practice
  • Cost and value
  • Evidence-based care
  • Interprofessional teams
  • Safety and improvement science
  • Response to errors
• Limiting Factor for Change
  • Lack of a critical mass of clinically-based faculty members who are ready to teach and model HSS.

Clinical teachers face complex challenges by teaching while simultaneously learning about redesigning clinical delivery systems while simultaneously delivering care and working more closely in interprofessional teams and healthcare delivery systems. Refer to Clay, MA, et.al. Acad Med, 2013.

Principles for Faculty development

• Employ effective change management strategies
• Employ sound educational practice
• Accountable practice.

Let’s start with Accountable practices and then come back to the first two bullets.

Accountable practices:

• We need to figure out how to align our educational roles, our institution’s needs, as well as, the excellence that we expect from our faculty participating in these types of programs.
• Funding is an important component.
• Must be adaptable

Employ effective change management strategies: (Reference: McLean, Cilliers, Van Wyck. Faculty development: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. Medical Teacher, 2008)

There are some things that we need to be thoughtful of and require significant planning.

• Institutional culture and content
• Overcome barriers
• Market to promote buy-in
• Involve experts in the design
• Multidisciplinary faculty
• Risk-taking role models.

Employ sound educational practice:
HSS provides us with amble opportunities to employ sound educational practices. HSS is not something that is stagnant, as it requires an interplay of multiple domains and multiple healthcare providers.

• Needs assessment
• Goals and priorities
• Accommodate diversity
• Use different formats for activities
• Employs principles of adult learning
• Create durable materials
• Extend over time

What challenges lie ahead in the developing faculty?

• Faculty (lack of) expertise
• Logistics of teaching HSS
• Evolving Health systems
• Providing meaning to faculty

Challenge 1: Is a Perceived Faculty Lack of Expertise

• Experiential knowledge is great
• Functional knowledge is limited
• Application varies by HSS domain
• Expertise relegated to the few (e.g., Chief Quality Officer)

How can we overcome the faculty lack of experience? What opportunities do we have? Leverage Faculty Experience.

• Embrace faculty (unique) expertise
• Utilize lived experiences
• Co-learning with the students
• Expand the concept of educators, where the educator does not necessarily have to be the expert.

Challenge 2: Logistics and Realities of Teaching HSS

• Limited space and opportunity in an already packed curriculum
• Lack of faculty role modeling in HSS
• Inconsistent expectations across UME-GME-CME
• Assessment is hard

What are the opportunities teaching HSS?

• Frame expectations for faculty
  • Understand the ‘lens’ through which the student enters the system
  • Develop the interprofessional teams
  • Focus on “Mindset, skillset, toolset” of students
  • Professional identify formation
• Align curricular structures and assessments
  • Ensure that HSS is “valued” in summative assessments
  • Signpost HSS curricular activities
  • Role model HSS in authentic clinical settings

Challenge 3: Faculty Buy-In is Lacking

• Topics are unfamiliar
• HSS is not routinely rewarded in academia
• Limited time to teach and role model due to competing demands
• Realities of compensation

What are opportunities of this challenge: Need to provide meaning!

• Formal incentives
  • Promotion and tenure
  • Support scholarly activities
  • Formal recognition (Can be as simple as a thank you for the Dean to a formal award such as “Teacher of the Year”
  • Diverse teaching opportunities
  • Creation of new professional roles such as small group facilitators, program leadership
• Leverage faculty professional identity
  • Faculty learning communities and interprofessional collaboration
  • New mentoring relationships
  • Personal growth and professional satisfaction
  • Transferrable and broadly applicable skills

Challenge 4: The Health System

• Health systems are not always viewed by faculty as a “partner”
• Students rotate in multiple health systems
• Health system priorities frequently change
• Faculty priorities may not align with health system priorities
• Uncertain future of healthcare

Opportunities here with regards to the Health System Challenge

• Introduce reality
  • Providers and systems are incentivized to partner to improve patient care
  • GME focus on sponsoring institutions
  • Prepare students to practice medicine for next 40-50 years
• What do we have in common?
  • Clinical and non-clinical priorities
  • Don’t “solve their (the clinical site) problem”  Facilitate their “solving of the problem”
  • Goal: Student development of background knowledge and skills
• Engaging the health system
  • Formalize partnership between medical school and health system to enhance clinical care AND education.
  • Leverage the clinical learning environment to focus on all health professions students, residents, and fellows
  • Students are future leaders for health systems and practices
  • Increased cross-campus collaborations and IPE

What are the opportunities for your institutions?

What are we doing at ECU?
Developed the Brody Teachers of Quality Academy
Evolving and improving:

• Educators to design curriculum
• Frontline educators to teach curriculum
• Clinical mentors and role models to change culture
• Expanded leadership and team concept

  Desired program components

• Interprofessional faculty
• Strong sponsorship
• Protected time
• Problem-centered
• Immediately applicable
• Tangible products as outcomes
• Faculty contributions to curricular design

  Lessons learned

• Faculty and learners can learn together
• Expand the definition of faculty
• Support interprofessional and intraprofessional development
• Teaching while practicing while learning is hard!
• Mentoring is critical
• Manage change and uncertainty
• Align institutional needs and faculty interest
• Money  protected time

What we are doing at UNMC

• Will start with a story.
• Start with the University (UNMC) and the Nebraska Medical Center that has always had a relationship. The relationship existed between educational units and clinical delivery systems.
• Health System Leader: “Isn’t that (education) what the University does?”
• Academic Leader: “What do they (hospital) care about education?”
• Realized needed to think about this differently and over the course of several years, many transformations took place where instead of just having a working relationship, we worked to develop a partnership.

Why is the alignment needed?

• Training competent providers require that they train in competent systems. Asch, et.al. JAMA, 2009
• Competent systems cannot exist without competent providers.
• Therefore, a partnership is a “win-win” relationship

Building Leader Role (Reference: Myers, et.al JGME, 2017)

• Institutional role with focused responsibility in alignment
  • Quality and patient safety role in GME
• Shared priorities between education and clinical enterprise
• Need to speak with each other’s language
• Chief “Dot-Connector”

Final thoughts

• Different approaches and roles to achieve common outcomes
• Different strategies for different situations
• Embrace and manage change (process  change)

Contact information:
Luan Lawson: lawsonjohnsonl@ecu.edu
Kelly Caverzagie: kelly.caverzagie@unmc.edu

[The following notes were generated by Rebecca Rowe, PhD.]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Spring 2020

Speakers: Mamta K. Singh, MD, MS; Clifford Packer, MD from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine (CWRU SOM)
Title: “Health Systems Science (HSS): The Clerkship Years in Medical School”
Series: Evolution and Revolution in Medical Education: Health Systems Sciences

Objectives

• To explore the ways in which HSS can be integrated into clinical clerkships
• To identify the use of HSS within clerkships evaluations
• To recognize how SOAP –(V)alue integrates clinical reasoning and value- based care at the bedside.
• To describe the impact SOAP-V had on medical students in the clinical clerkship years.

Dr. Singh started the presentation with an overview of the curriculum during the first 18 months for the medical students at CWRU SOM where the students are introduced to HSS. Rather than focus the discussion of HSS from the logistical point of view, Dr. Singh hopes to present her part of the webinar of HSS from the philosophical perspective by asking the question “Why is learning HSS critical for our future physicians professional development?”

Since this series was interrupted owing to COVID-19, our world has changed a great deal from the pandemic and the protests have exposed many weaknesses in our health care system such as inequities in COVID-19 deaths. It has been documented that the highest COVID-19 deaths have been consistently observed among those living in disadvantaged parts of society.1 This disadvantage coming in the form of poverty, crowding, or by population of color.

Recognizing these systems vulnerability, it is time to draw the borders of our health systems responsibility. A good place to start is with the professional development of our learners and our faculty.

Dr. Singh added a disclosure stating she is not trying to claim that a HSS curriculum is panacea by which we fix all of societies’ ills. With this said, the HSS curriculum provides us with a road map by which we can start to expand the outlook of professional development for both our faculty and learners. It helps us to re-image the borders of what a physician’s responsibility is.

The health professions that rose to the challenge during our recent pandemic, did not learn these skills overnight. These are skills that are innate. As we as medical educators built systems to train health care professionals, it is important to note that we have these inherent ‘change agents’ and we as medical educators need to ensure our curriculum is aligning with this.

Three key points of this Webinar

1. HSS curriculum at CWRU SOM
2. HSS Assessment
3. HSS in Clerkships – SOAP -V

HSS curriculum at CWRU SOM

HSS is not just a third pillar at CWRU SOM, but is really, truly integrated with the basic and clinical sciences.

Tenants of HSS integration

• Longitudinal, developmental curriculum
• How to improve health care quality, increase the value of care provide, enhance patient safety, deliver population-based medical care and work collaboratively in teams.
• How to advocate for patients and communities and recognize the socio-ecological determinants of health, health care policy and health care economics.
• Demonstrate Systems Based Competency
• Development of Change Agents

HSS at CWRU SOM’s Elevator pitch to First Year Medical Students in Block 1: “We are only as good as we diagnosed”  “We are only as good as the care we deliver”. Thinking your job is done after delivering the diagnosis is a very limited way of thinking of what physicians can do. A physician’s responsibility is not just about how well we can diagnose and how well our clinical reasoning is. Physicians are only as good as the care they deliver! Required deeper thinking. After the diagnosis is made, how are you as the physician going to deliver the care, what kind of coordination needs to be included, what kind of population health data would be important to consider, what is the value base components that allows for the care to be at the bedside?

This will allow us to answer the question “Are we actually delivering the care we set out to do?

Overview of the first two year curriculum at CWRU SOM is called Foundations of Medicine and Health and show the students are getting exposed to HSS. The curriculum integrates the basic, clinical and health system sciences over the span of 18 months. Topics covered includes: Immersive HHS, System and Scholarship: Community Engagement, QI, Population Health, Patient Navigator, Professional Learning Plans, Interprofessional Clinical, Tuesday Seminars (Health Disparities, Advocacy, Health Policy), Physical Diagnosis, Communication Skills, and Community Patient Care Preceptorship. All of these components are designed to help the student doctor answer the question “Are we actually delivering the care we set out to do?

A breakdown of Block 1, which is an immersive 5 week curriculum titled “Becoming a Doctor” was shared. Very early on the students are taught part of their role as a physician, they will have to know population health, determinants of health, health systems patient-centered care and how to bring it all together while they are thinking of the basic and clinical sciences.

Another component of the pre-clerkship years is Systems and Scholarship, which is a longitudinal curriculum in years 1 and 2 that enables the students to apply QI, population health and research skills to ensure patient care meets the Institute of Medicine’s 6 quality domains: safety, patient centeredness, equitable, efficient, timely and effective.

Block 1 focuses on awareness and System and Scholarship and the longitudinal curriculum is getting the student to apply these skills. This allows the students to be able to know how to approach a gap in care in the same manner they would approach a gap in physiology.

To summarize the principles behind what CWRU SOM is trying to do is to not only develop systems thinkers but also Change Agents. Students need to see themselves as “Active Participants” or “Co-Producers” of systems improvement.

If we link the professional development to systems improvements and to patient’s outcomes, there will be very few physicians or trainees that will think that this is not part of their job.

HSS Assessment

Assessment drives learning. What are some important ways that we can see if our students are actually learning the concepts behind HSS. Are the students able to reflect? Are they able to adapt? Can the students actually think at the systems level? Use portfolio method, which all students completed during years 1, 2 and 3. The portfolio allows students to give examples of when they have thought about the HSS curriculum and reflected on it.

Year 1 portfolio focuses on reflective practice, interprofessional team skills, and research skills. In years 2 and 3 start to expand to things that are more pertinent to HSS.

Have milestones for systems based practiced where they use 9 competencies specifically around systems based practices. These show the student at each development level what they need to understand in order to meet this larger competency. This has been mapped out across the years.

Starting this year Rising 3 years (between years 3 and 4) will do a portfolio on system based practice by addressing this prompt: “Describe a specific patient scenario over the last year in which you (and your clinical team) took into consideration economic and cultural factors, individual and family contributions, and the availability of health care system resources when making a clinical decision? Reflect on how you think this impacted the patient’s care and whether it helped or hindered care.”

Dr. Singh is hoping to impress on the audience is how the students are really thinking, not only about their clinical decision making, but how the larger system fits, and how the larger HSS learning has helped them get to this point. By reflecting and writing essays about this, we hope for them to see how these are truly integrated and not just three pillars standing by themselves.

Dr. Packard takes to provide us with a very specific and successful example of how this is happening at the clerkship level by introducing us to SOAP – Value A new pathway to high value care.

SOAP-V

SOAP-V was developed initially at the 2013 Millennium conference the subject of which was teaching value added care and the aim of this conference was to teach our future physicians to be judases in evidence based in their use of diagnostic tests and therapeutics.

SOAP-V is basically the SOAP note with value added. The thinking behind this was it was not only an opportunity for students to not only learn, but by using SOAP-V they could actually practice high valued care in authentic patient experiences by using it every day on the wards and in the clinic.

The beauty of SOAP-V in addition to its simplicity, it that it can be used with minimal to no faculty training, it can be attached to authentic patient experiences, and it would be ebbed in the normal work flow.

A plot of Life Expectancy vs. Cost of Care shows the U.S. health care spending is 2 – 4 times higher per capita than other developed nation yet our outcomes such as life expectancy is lower than many other developed countries. So why is the happening and how can we fix it?

SOAP-V takes a bottom up approach starting with medical students to address this.

An Overview of High Valued Care

An example of a high value test or treatment is when the benefits outweigh the risks.
Benefits includes improving outcomes, changes management and meet’s patient’s goals.
Risks include causing harm to patients, cost to patients and cost to the system.

In developing SOAP-V, the decision was made to boil it down to three main points:

1. Evidence of value: before ordering a test consider whether the result would change management. Before ordering treatment consider the evidence for the treatment vs. no treatment or an alternative treatment.
2. Patient values: Consider discussing with the patient their goals and values. Does the patient recognize the potential harm of the test/treatment compared to alternatives?
3. Relative cost: Consider the approximate cost of the test/treatment. Are there less costly alternatives with similar benefits? Where to get cost information: Healthcarebluebook.com and iTriage which is a mobile app.

Students are given a laminated SOAP-V Card that lists information on the components of the SOAP note – Subjective, Objectives, Assessment, Plan, and Value. Under value are the three points given above. The SOAP-V Card are given to all second year students before they go ont the wards.

There is evidence that if medical students are exposed to high value care early in their training that they will carry this information with them into their careers. Such a study is Spending Patterns in Region of Residency Training and Subsequent Expenditures for Care Provided by Practicing Physicians for Medical Beneficiaries JAMA 2014, 312 (22):2385-93.

Implementation of this in a study using 3 medical schools Penn State, Harvard-Beth Israel Deaconess, and Case Western Reserve. Each school had an intervention and control arm where the students in the intervention arm were reminded several times a week if they were using high value care (HVC). Data was collected using pre and post surveys on the attitudes of medical students, residents and faculty.

The results of the study resulted in several publications.

The key take away from this study: Moser et al. Soap to Soap-V: A new paradigm for teaching students high value care. Am J Med. 2017; 130 (11):1331-1336, showed:

• Medical students are well positioned to bring value discussions into patient care activities.
• Students at 3 medical schools used the SOAP-V framework during team presentations to apply high value care in their medical decision making.
• The intervention group reported higher self-efficacy toward addressing the economic health care crisis, initiating team discussion on unnecessary tests or treatments, and considering potential cost to patient and system; these changes were not present in the control group.

Another key take away from this study is this is a durable effect where it was maintained not only during the clerkship but at 6 and 12 months after the clerkship ended.

Results of thematic analysis of focus groups also published in Am J Med. 2017; 130(11);1331-1336 where three themes emerged:

1. SOAP-V served as a generalizable tool across clinical experiences
2. SOAP-V emphasized topics like cost and patient harm that were usually avoided.
3. SOAP-V facilitated value conversations.

Other SOAP-V Publications:
Moser EM, Huang G, Packer CD, Glod S, Smith CD, Alguire PC, Fazio S. SOAP-V: Introducing a method to empower medical students as change agents in bending the cost curve. J Hosp Med. 2016; 11(3):217-220.

Moser EM, Fazio S, Packer CD, Glod S, Smith CD, Alguire PC, Huang GC. SOAP to SOAP-V: A new paradigm for teaching students high value care. Am J Med. 2017; 130(11):1331-1336.

Packer C.D. (2019) Adding Value to the Oral Presentation. In: Presenting Your Case. Springer, Cham.

There are currently 11 medical schools using SOAP-V up from the original 3 medical schools.

SOAP-V 4 minute animated video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PLHpx1Kilw

Teaching soap-v to late second year students before they head out for their clerkship year
High Value Care Tools

• Online HVC Cases: https://hvc.acponline.org/physres_cases.html
• Simple cases on HVC: http://www.med-u.org/simple#
• Choosing Wisely lists: http://www.abimfoundation.org/Initiatives/Choosing-Wisely.aspx

References

Chen JT, Krieger N. Revealing the unequal burden of COVID-19 by income, race/ethnicity, and household crowding: US county vs ZIP code analyses. Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies Working Paper Series, Volume 19, Number 1. April 21, 2020. https://tinyurl.com/ya44we2r