
pmid: 30126678
We tested the hypothesis that trained medical faculty can train residents effectively in a mental health care model.After the authors trained medical faculty intensively for 15 months in primary care mental health, the newly trained faculty taught medical residents intensively. Residents were evaluated pre- and post-residency and compared to non-equivalent control residents in another city. Using ANOVA, the primary endpoint was residents' use of a mental health care model with simulated patients. Secondary endpoints were residents' skills using models for patient-centered interviewing and for informing and motivating patients.For the mental health care model, there was a significant interaction between study site and time (F = 33.51, p < .001, Eta2 = .34); mean pre-test and post-test control group scores were 8.15 and 8.79, respectively, compared to 7.44 and 15.0 for the intervention group. Findings were similarly positive for models of patient-centered interviewing and informing and motivating.Training medical faculty to teach residents a mental health care model offers a new educational approach to the widespread problem of poor mental health care.While the models tested here can provide guidance in conducting mental health care, further evaluation of the train-the-trainer program for preparing residents is needed.
Male, Mental Health Services, Faculty, Medical, Communication, Teaching, Internship and Residency, Mental Health, Education, Medical, Graduate, Patient-Centered Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Clinical Competence, Educational Measurement, Staff Development, Program Development, Program Evaluation
Male, Mental Health Services, Faculty, Medical, Communication, Teaching, Internship and Residency, Mental Health, Education, Medical, Graduate, Patient-Centered Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Clinical Competence, Educational Measurement, Staff Development, Program Development, Program Evaluation
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 6 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
