MedEdPORTAL (May 2012)

“MiPLAN” to Teach With the Assistance of Our Patients

  • Chad Stickrath,
  • Melver Anderson,
  • Eva Aagaard

DOI
https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.9173
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Educators espouse the benefits of bedside teaching, that is, teaching in the presence of the patient, and faculty and trainees report they would like to see this method of education increase. However, studies show that the proportion of teaching that occurs in the presence of the patient continues to diminish. Furthermore, faculty feel inadequately prepared to teach in this setting. We developed a model for clinical teaching based upon these principles of learning and derived from decades of collective medical education experience. The aim was to deconstruct the highly complex activities of effective clinical teachers and repackage them in a manner that would be memorable and helpful for other teachers. In particular, we hope that this method will promote more and higher-quality teaching with the patient present. This model, named MiPLAN, encourages teachers to meet their learners before engaging in shared clinical and educational activities (the M) and to focus on five areas as the learner presents in the presence of the patient (the i's: introductions, interruptions, in the moment, inspection, and independent thought); the model then provides an algorithm for teaching after the presentation (the PLAN: patient care-centered, learner-centered, attending-centered, and next steps). This resource teaches the MiPLAN model in a workshop session lasting 90–120 minutes. The workshop utilizes a PowerPoint presentation. We have implemented this faculty development workshop on five occasions: once at the Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine (APDIM) Chief Residents Annual Meeting, three times at the local school of medicine, and once at a local chief resident teaching retreat. Evaluations collected from the APDIM workshop were very positive. The presentation scored an average 6.44 out of 7 and the content a 6.31 out of 7 from 59 respondents. Comments included “Excellent session,” “Great incorporation of videos,” “The best session I attended,” and “Very useful tools.” Evaluations collected from the local sessions have also been very positive, with averages of 3.67-3.89 out of 4 for ratings on the organization, usefulness, and quality of the content and presentation.

Keywords