US medical school curriculum on opioid use disorder-a topic review of current curricular research and evaluation of winning student-designed opioid curricula for the 2021 Coalition on Physician Education in Substance Use Disorders curricular competition.

IF 2.5 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) Pub Date : 2023-10-27 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpain.2023.1257141
Ling Cao, Jennifer Van Deusen
{"title":"US medical school curriculum on opioid use disorder-a topic review of current curricular research and evaluation of winning student-designed opioid curricula for the 2021 Coalition on Physician Education in Substance Use Disorders curricular competition.","authors":"Ling Cao, Jennifer Van Deusen","doi":"10.3389/fpain.2023.1257141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The opioid crisis in the US severely affected and continues to affect population's health. The opioid crisis was in part fueled by inadequate pain management, which is in part due to the inadequate education in both pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) for health care professionals. In 2021, the Coalition on Physician Education in Substance Use Disorders (COPE) organized a curricular competition soliciting US medical students-designed OUD-related curricula. Twelve winning curricula were identified. Here, we first conducted a topic review regarding current US medical school OUD curricula. Then we evaluated the COPE winning curricula and compared them to the curricula identified in the topic review. For the topic review, ten relevant databases were searched up to December 31, 2021 using a combination of pre-determined keywords. Total of 25 peer-reviewed articles were selected based on the pre-determined criteria, which included 5 articles describing opioid curricular development at the state level (AZ, CA, MA, PA, and RI), 17 research articles evaluating a curriculum developed in a single institution, 2 literature reviews, and 1 article detailing curricular development and validation processes in a single institution. Although vary in organizations and formats, state-level curricula were comprehensive and could be adopted by other states or institutions with necessary local issue-based modifications. Faculty development and critical resources were major challenges for curricular implementation. The 17 research articles exhibited good scientific quality (Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) score = 11.94 ± 2.33 (maximal score = 18)). All research articles reported to some extent, the success of respective curriculum, in improving students' knowledge in and/or attitude towards OUD, based on primarily pre- and post- comparisons. Compared to these published curricula, winning students-designed curricula had more specific focuses, diverse learning activities, and varieties in assessment methods. For all curricula, long-term evaluations were lacking. Except for the state level curricula, majority of the other curricula did not emphasize specifically on chronic pain education or the biopsychosocial approach. Interprofessional education approach was also lacking. Our topic review and curricular evaluation highlighted the needs for integrating OUD and chronic pain medical curricula, developing long-term assessment tools, and more OUD curriculum research overall.</p>","PeriodicalId":73097,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10641501/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2023.1257141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The opioid crisis in the US severely affected and continues to affect population's health. The opioid crisis was in part fueled by inadequate pain management, which is in part due to the inadequate education in both pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) for health care professionals. In 2021, the Coalition on Physician Education in Substance Use Disorders (COPE) organized a curricular competition soliciting US medical students-designed OUD-related curricula. Twelve winning curricula were identified. Here, we first conducted a topic review regarding current US medical school OUD curricula. Then we evaluated the COPE winning curricula and compared them to the curricula identified in the topic review. For the topic review, ten relevant databases were searched up to December 31, 2021 using a combination of pre-determined keywords. Total of 25 peer-reviewed articles were selected based on the pre-determined criteria, which included 5 articles describing opioid curricular development at the state level (AZ, CA, MA, PA, and RI), 17 research articles evaluating a curriculum developed in a single institution, 2 literature reviews, and 1 article detailing curricular development and validation processes in a single institution. Although vary in organizations and formats, state-level curricula were comprehensive and could be adopted by other states or institutions with necessary local issue-based modifications. Faculty development and critical resources were major challenges for curricular implementation. The 17 research articles exhibited good scientific quality (Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) score = 11.94 ± 2.33 (maximal score = 18)). All research articles reported to some extent, the success of respective curriculum, in improving students' knowledge in and/or attitude towards OUD, based on primarily pre- and post- comparisons. Compared to these published curricula, winning students-designed curricula had more specific focuses, diverse learning activities, and varieties in assessment methods. For all curricula, long-term evaluations were lacking. Except for the state level curricula, majority of the other curricula did not emphasize specifically on chronic pain education or the biopsychosocial approach. Interprofessional education approach was also lacking. Our topic review and curricular evaluation highlighted the needs for integrating OUD and chronic pain medical curricula, developing long-term assessment tools, and more OUD curriculum research overall.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国医学院关于阿片类药物使用障碍的课程-对当前课程研究的主题回顾和2021年药物使用障碍医师教育联盟课程竞赛中获奖学生设计的阿片类药物课程的评估。
美国的阿片类药物危机严重影响并继续影响着人们的健康。阿片类药物危机的部分原因是疼痛管理不足,而疼痛管理不足的部分原因是卫生保健专业人员在疼痛和阿片类药物使用障碍方面的教育不足。2021年,药物使用障碍医师教育联盟(COPE)组织了一场课程竞赛,征集美国医学生设计与药物使用障碍相关的课程。选出了12个获奖课程。在这里,我们首先对当前美国医学院OUD课程进行了主题回顾。然后,我们评估了COPE获奖课程,并将其与主题审查中确定的课程进行了比较。为了进行主题审查,使用预先确定的关键词组合搜索到2021年12月31日之前的10个相关数据库。根据预先确定的标准,共选择了25篇同行评议的文章,其中包括5篇描述州一级(AZ, CA, MA, PA和RI)阿片类药物课程开发的文章,17篇评估单个机构开发的课程的研究文章,2篇文献综述,1篇详细介绍单个机构课程开发和验证过程的文章。虽然组织和形式各不相同,但州一级的课程是全面的,可以由其他州或机构根据当地问题进行必要的修改后采用。教师发展和关键资源是课程实施的主要挑战。17篇研究论文的科学质量较好(医学教育研究质量仪器评分= 11.94±2.33(最高评分= 18))。所有研究文章都在一定程度上报告了各自课程在提高学生对OUD的知识和/或态度方面的成功,主要基于前后比较。与这些已出版的课程相比,获奖学生设计的课程重点更明确,学习活动更多样化,评估方法也更多样化。所有课程都缺乏长期评估。除了州一级的课程外,大多数其他课程都没有特别强调慢性疼痛教育或生物心理社会方法。跨专业教育方法也缺乏。我们的主题回顾和课程评估强调了整合OUD和慢性疼痛医学课程、开发长期评估工具以及更多OUD课程研究的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Rescue analgesia with a transversus abdominis plane block alleviates moderate-to-severe pain and improves oxygenation after abdominal surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Evaluating pain in non-verbal critical care patients: a narrative review of the critical care pain observation tool and Its clinical applications. Pediatric pain physician workforce: an assessment of supply and demand. Enhancing analgesia in acute renal colic pain: a randomized controlled trial of gabapentin adjunct to ketorolac-based regimen. Non-opioid psychiatric medications for chronic pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1