scholarly journals Novel Clinical Needs Finding Course Brings Biomedical Engineering Students Together with Regional Medical Campus Students, Residents, and Faculty to Solve Real-World Problems

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raj Raghavendra Rao ◽  
Hanna Jensen ◽  
Thomas Schulz ◽  
Pearl McElfish
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Engineering ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
The State ◽  
Land Grant ◽  
University Of Arkansas ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Land Grant University ◽  
Regional Medical ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
The University

Biomedical engineering is the fastest growing engineering field in the United States, preparing a generation of skilled problem-solvers who, together with healthcare professionals, drive the momentum of novel technologies for prevention, detection, treatment, and monitoring of disease. It is important to the education of biomedical engineers that the dialogue between healthcare professionals and schools of engineering is seamless, constant, and interactive. Lack of sustainable discourse between those who produce technologies and those who use them could reduce the applicability and relevance of the biomedical engineering education1,2. Reciprocally, for healthcare professionals to optimally harness the expertise of their engineering colleagues, a direct interaction is required. The department of Biomedical Engineering (BMEG) is one of the largest departments within the College of Engineering at the University of Arkansas, with approximately 70 students graduating annually. Established in 2012, as the first and only biomedical engineering program in the state of Arkansas, the department is establishing itself as one of the premier research departments on campus. The department prides itself in its commitment to diversity and has been successful in attracting diverse groups of students to enter the field of science and engineering.  In the spring of 2018, the BMEG undergraduate student body had the highest percentage of female and underrepresented minorities within the college of engineering—53% female and 37% minority. The University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) is the only allopathic medical school in the state of Arkansas. In 2007, UAMS established UAMS-Northwest as a regional campus in Fayetteville. UAMS-Northwest extends UAMS’ medical education, research, and clinical mission. UAMS-Northwest has ~250 students in the colleges of medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and health professions, as well as 48 family medicine and internal medicine residents. UAMS-Northwest is located more than 200 miles from the main UAMS campus in Little Rock but is only one mile from Arkansas’ land grant university, the University of Arkansas. This proximity of the regional medical campus to the land grant university provides opportunities for collaboration that can benefit the students of both institutions. This article provides an overview of the implementation and preliminary assessment of a novel Clinical Needs Finding course that was recently instituted as a collaboration between the Department of Biomedical Engineering and the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences– Northwest Campus.

scholarly journals Editor's Note

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Johns
Keyword(s):  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Washington Dc ◽  
University Of Arkansas ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Regional Campuses ◽  
Regional Medical ◽  
Regional Campus ◽  
The University

We are happy to publish our third issue of the Journal of Regional Medical Campuses. The response we have received has been excellent, both in numbers and quality of submissions. Our editorial board continues to meet regularly to discuss suggestions from our readers and future plans. Please continue to pass the word of our journal to your colleagues on our regional campuses.   I would like to acknowledge the article “Lessons learned through a partnership with Marshallese faith-based organizations to screen for hypertension and diabetes” by Dr. Pearl McElfish from the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Northwest Regional Campus. The program she describes was the winner of the 2017 AAMC Regional Medical Campus Star of Community Achievement Award. This award was presented at the GRMC Spring meeting in Washington, DC.   Alan Johns, MD, MEd Co-Editor, Journal of Regional Medical Campuses

scholarly journals Learning During COVID-19: Rapid E-Learning Transition at a Regional Medical School Campus

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramey Moore ◽  
Rachel Purvis ◽  
Cari Bogulski ◽  
Tina Maddox ◽  
Lauren Haggard-Duff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
University Of Arkansas ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Learning Modalities ◽  
Learning Success ◽  
Regional Medical ◽  
Northwest Arkansas ◽  
E Learning ◽  
Qualitative Descriptive ◽  
The University

COVID-19 has changed the day-to-day landscape of education for students, faculty, and staff worldwide, and this is especially true for students in health sciences and medical education programs. This paper explores the effects of the rapid shift to e-learning modalities for students at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Northwest, a regional medical campus located in Northwest Arkansas. A survey and open-ended written interview questions was conducted with a total of 144 student respondents and in-depth follow up interviews were conducted with 29 of those students. Utilizing descriptive statistics and qualitative descriptive analysis, the survey and interviews explored the effects of COVID-19 on the lived experiences of students as part of the transition to e-learning.  We found that 64.5% students reported satisfaction with the transition to e-learning as good or very good and the primary themes that influenced e-learning success for students were: Communication, technology, pedagogy, and community.

scholarly journals A Better Learning Community: Mixed-Methods Reveal Medical Student Preferences with Implications for Learning Community Design and Implementation

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 238212052110148
Author(s):  
Jasna Vuk ◽  
Steven McKee ◽  
Sara Tariq ◽  
Priya Mendiratta
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Learning Community ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Free Form ◽  
University Of Arkansas ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Personal Support ◽  
School Learning ◽  
The University

Background: Medical school learning communities benefit students. The College of Medicine (COM) at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) provides medical students with academic, professional, and personal support through a learning community (LC) made of 7 academic houses. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of the academic house model at UAMS utilizing a mixed-methods survey. The aims were to: (1) assess student experience and satisfaction with academic houses, (2) describe the realms of advising and guidance, and (3) identify areas for improvement. Method: An online survey was assigned to 723 COM students (all students enrolled, first through fourth years) at UAMS in March 2019. The survey was comprised of 25 items (10 multiple-choice, 8 on the Likert scale, and 7 open-ended questions). Data was depicted using frequency and percentages and/or thematic review of free-form responses. Results: The survey response rate was 31% (227 students). The majority of students responding (132, 58.1%) attended 2 or more face-to-face meetings with the faculty advisor within the preceding year. However, 27 (11.9%) students did not have any meetings. Approximately two-thirds of the respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the guidance and direction provided by their advisors [very satisfied (n = 83; 36.6%); satisfied (n = 77; 33.9%)]. Themes that emerged from student generated areas for improvement include time constraints, advisor/advisee interest mismatch, and perceived inadequacy of advising content/connections. Conclusions: This study confirms the effectiveness of the LC model for advising and mentoring in the COM at UAMS. Uniquely, this study identifies not only learners’ satisfaction with their LC but also highlights areas for improvement which are widely generalizable and important to consider for institutions with or planning to start an LC.

Pathologists in a Teaching Institution Assess the Value of the Autopsy

2002 ◽  
Vol 126 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilene B. Bayer-Garner ◽  
Louis M. Fink ◽  
Laura W. Lamps
Keyword(s):  
Technology Use ◽  
University Of Arkansas ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Teaching Institution ◽  
Autopsy Report ◽  
Microscopic Evaluation ◽  
Diagnostic Technology ◽  
Clinical Questions ◽  
The University ◽  
Major Diagnosis

Abstract Context.—With the advent of modern diagnostic technology, use of the autopsy as a means of assessing diagnostic accuracy has declined precipitously. Interestingly, during the same period, the rate of misdiagnosis found at autopsy has not changed. Objectives.—To ascertain why an autopsy was requested, whether or not questions asked by clinicians were specifically addressed, and what types of misdiagnoses were found. Design.—One hundred forty-two consecutive autopsy records from the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Hospital were reviewed. In the same period, 715 deaths occurred, giving an overall autopsy rate of 20.14%. Results.—Of the 125 autopsies in which the problem-oriented autopsy request was available for review, a reason for the autopsy was given in only 69 cases (55%). One hundred three clinical questions were asked, and of these, 81 were specifically addressed in the final anatomic diagnosis, 10 were addressed in some part of the autopsy report but not in the final anatomic diagnosis, 10 were not addressed at all, and 2 could not be answered by the autopsy. Sixty-one autopsies revealed 81 misdiagnoses: 47 class I (missed major diagnosis that, if detected before death, could have led to a change in management that might have resulted in cure or prolonged survival) and 34 class II misdiagnoses (missed major diagnosis in which antemortem detection would have not led to a change in management). Conclusions.—The autopsy continues to be a vital part of medical education and quality assurance. It is important for the clinician to provide a clinical summary and specific clinical questions to be addressed or to speak directly with the pathologist and for the pathologist to provide answers that are easily accessible within the autopsy report. In this way, a problem-oriented autopsy can be performed based on questions raised by the clinician and the pathologist as a result of the gross dissection and microscopic evaluation.

Social and Ethical Concerns of Biomedical Engineering Research and Practice

2011 ◽  
pp. 54-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Snehasish Mishra
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Biomedical Engineering ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Healthcare Sector ◽  
Technological Advancement ◽  
Ethical Values ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Engineering Research ◽  
Bioethical Issues

Biomedical engineering is an advanced and relatively new field in the healthcare sector. Owing to the very nature of the various professional challenges faced by healthcare professionals, the moral and ethical values seem to have taken the backburner. The factors contributing to it may include a sound knowledge of the healthcare professional on the legally-permissible ethical values, and the desperate situations requiring precise split-moment decision-making. No technological advancement without a human face is worth it, and hence, during the course of the degree, a biomedical engineering student needs to be exposed to various ethical issues through theory, live cases and demonstrations. Being intrinsically multi- and inter-disciplinary, biomedical engineering lacks precise ethical rules that delineate and delimit professional responsibility, thus blurring the ethical understanding of biomedical engineering. The solution seems to lie in giving due place to human virtues. In the coming days, bioethical issues are expected to be increasingly complicated and dominating the decision-making process owing to the advancements in sciences, and the ever-complicated cases handled by healthcare professionals. A global healthcare and ethics-related online open-access portal may serve as a common platform for all the stakeholders in the interest and ethical growth of biomedical engineering in particular and medical sciences in general.

Addressing Opioid-Associated Constipation Using Quality Oncology Practice Initiative Scores and Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycles

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. e91-e97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Varinder Kaur ◽  
Sajjad Haider ◽  
Appalanaidu Sasapu ◽  
Paulette Mehta ◽  
Konstantinos Arnaoutakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
University Of Arkansas ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Chart Audit ◽  
Patient Satisfaction Scores ◽  
Quality Of Patient Care ◽  
Opioid Medications ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
The University ◽  
Young Physicians

Using the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative, an affiliate program of ASCO, we outlined opioid-associated constipation (OAC) as a subject in need of quality improvement (QI) in our fellowship program at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System. We initiated a fellow-led QI project to advance the quality of patient care and provide a valuable avenue for QI training of young physicians. Fellows organized meetings with all stakeholders, addressed the scope of the problem, and devised strategies for OAC management. Monthly meetings were organized using Plan-Do-Study-Act principles. Mandatory check boxes were inserted into our electronic medical record templates to remind all physicians to identify patients on opioid medications and assess and address OAC. Final chart audit and patient satisfaction surveys were performed 6 months after project initiation. Assessment of OAC improved from 52% at baseline to 92% ( P < .003). This improvement corresponded with high patient satisfaction scores, with 90% of surveyed patients reporting adequate management of their constipation. In this QI initiative, we showed that participation in ASCO’s Quality Oncology Practice Initiative helps identify areas in need of QI, and such fellow-led QI projects can serve as models for QI training of young physicians.

Screening and genetic counseling practices for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC)

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6564-6564
Author(s):  
S. Karri ◽  
S. R. Govindarajan ◽  
W. B. Bendure ◽  
S. A. Jackson ◽  
K. D. McKelvey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Genetic Counseling ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
University Of Arkansas ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Bethesda Criteria ◽  
Autosomal Dominant Fashion ◽  
The University

6564 Background: HNPCC, the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC), is inherited in an autosomal dominant fashion and caused by micro satellite instability and mutations in mismatch repair genes. Affected patients (pts) and first degree relatives tend to develop colonic and extra colonic tumors that need to be tested for the mutations. Genetic consultation (GC) should be routinely offered to the affected pts and relatives. To assess the utilization of GC, we assessed the frequency of referral for GC for the presence of HNPCC syndrome at our medical center. Methods: Patients with CRC were identified from the tumor registry at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) and the Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System (CAVHS) from January 1st 2000 to September, 2006. Pts’ charts were reviewed for synchronous or metachronous HNPCC tumors and family history (FH). FH was categorized as positive according to the Bethesda criteria (BC, 2000–2002), revised Bethesda criteria (RBC, 2003–2006), negative (documented FH but no h/o cancer) or inadequate documentation. Percentage of pts with positive FH for HNPCC syndrome and those with CRC less than 50 years of age (for pts diagnosed 2003–2006) who were referred for GC was calculated. The list of these pts was cross referenced to the list in genetics clinic at UAMS and CAVHS. Results: 858 patient charts were reviewed. Table 1 shows the number of pts meeting criteria for genetic counseling. 138 (16%) pts had inadequate /no documented FH. Of the 720 pts with documented FH, 67 (9.3%) had positive FH and 126(17%) met BC / RBC. Only 13 (10.3%) of 126 pts were referred for genetic counseling. The number of pts eligible for GC increased with inclusion of RBC. However, the percentage of eligible pts referred for GC was extremely low. Conclusions: FH is not adequately documented in many pts presenting with CRC. Only a small percentage of pts who qualify for GC are referred. Education of health care providers for referral to genetics counseling is warranted. No significant financial relationships to disclose. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document