Making It Count Twice: A Single Age‐Friendly Deprescribing Workshop for Either Medical Residents or Geriatric Fellows
Andrea Wershof Schwartz reports serving as faculty for the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Age-Friendly Health systems initiative. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest. Text S1. Resident competencies, fellow milestones, and learning objectives for the workshop. The resident version of the workshop was derived from three medication management competencies for graduating internal medicine and family medicine residents. The fellow version of the workshop was derived from two medication management milestones for graduating Geriatric Medicine Fellows. We then created learning objectives for each group using Miller's pyramid. Miller's pyramid is an organizing framework for assessment in healthcare professions' clinical skills, competence, and performance across a continuum from factual knowledge (knows) to translating skills (does). We used Miller's pyramid to create workshop objectives across the continuum of educational competencies for IM/FM residents (knows, knows how, shows, does) and Geriatric Medicine Fellows (knows how, shows, does). We assessed learner change in self-efficacy and knowledge in the pre- and post-survey, see Text S2. We created these assessments with the learning objectives in mind. Text S2. Self-efficacy and knowledge assessment results. Forty (71%) residents and 18 (60%) fellows completed the paired pre- and post-self-assessments. The percent of confident residents increased from 0% to 60% (p < 0.05) after the workshop, and residents demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in each self-efficacy domain. The percent of confident fellows increased from an average of 6%–89% (p < 0.05) after the workshop. Fellows demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in each self-efficacy domain. Of the 40 residents and 18 fellows that participated in the workshop, 23 (40%) completed the post-survey open-ended response section. Responses were reviewed collectively to assess for trends, with selected examples of positive feedback. Text S3. Workshop slides. This supplement includes slides to use, as well as a script for speakers in the notes section of each slide. There is one slide set for either the resident version or fellow version. Several slides may be hidden or unhidden depending on which version speakers are leading; see Text S5 for guidance. Text S4. Workshop handout. This is the workshop handout for either the resident version or fellow version. Text S5. Facilitator guide and optional assessments. This includes the timing and talking points, as well as any audience engagement if the talk will be virtual. There is a separate roadmap for the resident version and the fellow version. This roadmap points out the differences from the resident version to the fellow version. In addition, this supplement includes optional immediate pre- and post-assessments. There are different assessments for the resident version and the fellow version. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
Authors
- Sarah C. Phillips (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3173-7596)
- Laura K. Triantafylidis (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8818-9535)
- Chelsea E. Hawley (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6136-8189)
- Andrew A. Swanner (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1045-4618)
- Andrea Wershof Schwartz (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2076-6068)
- Ryan Chippendale (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2860-8221)
Institutions
- Boston University (US)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Boston Medical Center (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- VA Boston Healthcare System (US)
- Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
- Published
- 2025-05-19
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19529
- Primary Topic
- Innovations in Medical Education
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00