Tsai Hung-Wei, Issenberg S Barry, Chen Yi-Chun, Kang Enoch Yi-No, Chen Hui-Wen, Wu Jen-Chieh
Department of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, R.O.C.
University of Miami Gordon Center for Simulation and Innovation in Medical, Education, Miami, FL, USA.
Med Teach. 2025 Jun;47(6):963-969. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2024.2390039. Epub 2024 Aug 16.
Sharing mental models is essential for high-performance teams, and speaking up is key for exchanging critical insights, especially during medical errors. Understanding how health providers and trainees voice their concerns is crucial for improving speaking-up behavior. This study aims to fill a gap in the literature by examining how medical students speak up when they encounter medical errors and assessing the impact of training on their speaking-up patterns.
A quasi-experimental study involving 146 students, who were divided into two groups, was conducted in Northern Taiwan. One group of students encountered life-threatening scenario before intervention, followed by a faculty-led personalized debriefing session, then a non-life-threatening scenario after the intervention. Another group of students underwent these sessions in the reverse order. Students' Speaking-up patterns, including expression style, form and attitude, and their speaking-up confidence were assessed at pre- and post-intervention scenarios.
During pre-intervention scenario, in expression style, 50 students (34.5%) addressed their concerns to medical errors with direct expression and 14 students (9.7%) utilized indirect hint to express their concerns. In expression form, 31 students (21.4%) addressed their concerns to medical errors with affirmative sentences and 33 students (22.8%) asked questions to express their concerns. In speaking-up attitude, 47 students (32.4%) used unoffensive words, while 17 students (11.7%) used offensive words. After intervention, significantly change of speaking-up styles, forms, and attitude were observed along with their speaking-up confidence ( < 0.001).
Medical students are inclined to speak up in the event of medical errors using more direct expression and affirmative sentences, along with increased speaking-up confidence after simulation scenario learning and faculty-led personalized debriefing. Healthcare educators can focus more on discussing with students the advantages and disadvantages of various approaches of speaking-up in medical errors, helping them to develop effective speaking-up behaviors in a variety of medical contexts.
共享心智模式对高绩效团队至关重要,而直言不讳是交流关键见解的关键,尤其是在医疗差错期间。了解医疗服务提供者和实习生如何表达他们的担忧对于改善直言行为至关重要。本研究旨在通过考察医学生在遇到医疗差错时如何直言不讳,并评估培训对其直言模式的影响,来填补文献中的空白。
在台湾北部进行了一项涉及146名学生的准实验研究,这些学生被分为两组。一组学生在干预前遇到危及生命的情景,随后是由教师主导的个性化汇报环节,然后在干预后遇到非危及生命的情景。另一组学生以相反的顺序经历这些环节。在干预前和干预后的情景中评估学生的直言模式,包括表达方式、形式和态度,以及他们的直言信心。
在干预前的情景中,在表达方式上,50名学生(34.5%)以直接表达的方式表达他们对医疗差错的担忧,14名学生(9.7%)利用间接暗示来表达他们的担忧。在表达形式上,31名学生(21.4%)用肯定句表达他们对医疗差错的担忧,33名学生(22.8%)通过提问来表达他们的担忧。在直言态度上,47名学生(32.4%)使用无冒犯性的语言,而17名学生(11.7%)使用冒犯性的语言。干预后,观察到直言风格、形式和态度以及他们的直言信心有显著变化(<0.001)。
医学生在遇到医疗差错时倾向于使用更直接的表达和肯定句来直言不讳,并且在模拟情景学习和教师主导的个性化汇报后直言信心有所增强。医疗保健教育工作者可以更多地关注与学生讨论在医疗差错中各种直言方式的优缺点,帮助他们在各种医疗环境中形成有效的直言行为。