THE CONTRIBUTION
OF ACTORS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES TO THE TRAINING OF MEDICAL
STUDENTS: A Collaboration between the Division of Mental
Health, St. George's, University of London and the Strathcona Drama
Workshop, London
A Thacker, W Perez, N Crabbe,
C McCluskey, S Hollins, O Raji
(UK)
 |
"Doctors must be good listeners if they are to
understand the problems of their patients and they must
be able to provide advice and explanations that are comprehensible
to patients and their relatives" (General Medical Council,
1993: Tomorrow's Doctors, London GMC).
In the past three years, some 1,000 future doctors at St. George's, University of London,
have benefited from training by actors with intellectual
disabilities. The actors, known as "simulated patients",
encourage second year students to practice taking histories
and explaining medical conditions. "Simulated patients"
help fourth year students rehearse health-screening procedures,
prior to undertaking consultations in community based clinics
for people with intellectual disabilities. They also assist
with examinations including "finals" examinations,
in which the "intellectual disabilities" component
has equal value with other medical specialities. These programmes
have evolved from experience over nearly 20 years of drama
workshops being offered to medical students by actors with
intellectual disabilities.
|
This programme's goals are:
- To produce doctors who are skilled, sensitive, and confident
in communicating directly with and managing the health needs
of people with intellectual disabilities by: improving their
ability to observe and understand non-verbal cues and developmentally
innovative or idiosyncratic use of language; by practising techniques
for checking patients' comprehension, for negotiating consent
procedures, and by involving informants appropriately.
- To demonstrate the importance of being proactive in attending
to the health care needs of people with intellectual disabilities.
- To challenge diagnostic overshadowing.
TRAINING METHODS
Simulated patient selection
Six adults with intellectual disabilities were recruited from
a drama course run by the Strathcona Theatre Company in London.
They include males and females, some of whom are African Caribbean.
The actors receive payment at the same rate as professional actors
who do not have intellectual disabilities.
The Trainers
The actors take an active part in designing the characters of
the "patients" they portray, their life stories, and
their medical histories. They have control over whether they allow
the medical students to touch them; and whether they need the
medical students to speak louder, for example. These decisions
are reflected in the instructions to the students. If students
do not respect the actors' wishes, this is reflected in our assessment
of them.
The Training Programme
Actors and trainers meet twice weekly for two-hour training sessions
over the course of six weeks. Training initially takes place in
the Medical School. Actors' skills in communicating information
verbally and non-verbally are advanced as they develop their "patient"
characters.
A typical two-hour training session in the fourth week of the
six week course involved:
- The team fed back on difficulties they had experienced in
practicing. This resulted in discussions and adaptations to
the scenarios.
- The rehearsal of a clinical practice examination scenario:
a) The team commented on videotaped interactions. We decided
to practice asking for the clarification of medical words.
b) The trainers took a lead in interviewing using as many different
words and abbreviations as they could. Viewing the video later,
the group identified occasions when challenges should have been
made.
c) We discussed ways of asking for clarification effectively
but courteously. The actors were worried about hurting the students'
feelings.
d) Step (a) was repeated until some of the participants demonstrated
their confidence in interrupting an interview. Some decided
that they could not formulate a verbal challenge quickly enough,
but felt comfortable holding up a hand to stop the student.
- Two medical students took part in mock exams. After the exam
interview, each of the participants (student, "patient",
and "examiner") fed back their impressions.
- During group discussion, several of the actors said that
they felt sorry that they had to "give the nice students
a hard time", e.g. by refusing medication.
- The group visited the clinical cubicles where the examinations
would take place. This familiarised them with the rather cramped
conditions and the furnishings.
We have learned the importance of tailoring every training series
to the personalities, interests, experience and abilities of all
participants.
Most sessions are videotaped. Actors watch the videotapes immediately
afterwards and feed back their comments.
Employment in Clinical Examination
Students are asked to negotiate consent for medical treatment.
The task involves using accessible language, with visual aids
if appropriate, to describe the intended treatment and establish
the understanding of the "patient".
Employment in teaching sessions
The "simulated patients" assist students in practicing
health screening procedures, prior to consultations in community
based clinics for people with intellectual disabilities. The tasks
generally include history taking, otoscopy, and blood pressure
checks carried out on a one-to-one basis. The actors always meet
with the students afterwards to feed back their impressions.
SOME CHALLENGES WE HAVE ADDRESSED:
- The "simulated patients" did not ask spontaneously
for clarification of medical terminology and abbreviations.
This closed off the possibility of students becoming experienced
in adapting their language. A lot of training time was spent
in negotiating with the actors ways of halting interviews to
show that they did not understand. Overcompliance is associated
with some people with intellectual disabilities. Students are
therefore assessed on their awareness of this and their ability
to check for comprehension.
- One of the actors is a diabetic. Initially she tended to give
permission for a blood test before the student had had an opportunity
to explain the procedure.
- One of the actors gave consent too readily to a student whom
he found attractive. Another was unduly critical of a student
of a different ethnic background.
It is striking that the actors' need for support has reduced
dramatically as their experience grows.
ENCOURAGING FEEDBACK AND DEVELOPMENTS
Students who have participated in training with the actors have:
- expressed overwhelmingly positive attitudes and beliefs about
the people with intellectual disabilities in medical interviews;
- fed back their views and indicated that working with the actors
was "the most valuable aspect of the course". Some
students have said that they would welcome the opportunity to
practice interviews dealing with more abstract lifestyle issues,
such as difficulties in making friends and finding jobs;
- become sufficiently engaged with the experiences of people
with intellectual disabilities to prepare a related topic of
their own choice to their peers; and
- been dismayed by the extent of people's undetected health
problems during the health screening.
The funding for recruiting, training and employing the first
actors was provided by a Department of Health Shared Training
Award. St George's, University of London now pays the actors
for each session of employment.
Appendix:
The score sheet used by examiners on the Objective Structured
Clinical Examination, Year 4, MBBS, shows the skills we expect
of doctors-in-training.
Examiner's Instructions:
"Attempted" should be marked if the skill is exhibited
inconsistently or the patient is unlikely to understand the candidate's
language: e.g. Item 5: "You have a statutory right to withhold
consent"
| |
Not done
|
Attempted
|
Good
|
| 1. Introduces self fully |
0
|
|
1
|
| 2. Explains purpose of
interview |
0
|
1
|
2
|
| 3. Addresses
patient rather than carer/examiner |
0
|
1
|
2
|
| 4. Adapts language level |
0
|
2
|
3
|
| 5. Informs patient of her
right to refuse |
0
|
1
|
2
|
| 6. Asks patient
to reiterate what they understand |
0
|
1
|
2
|
| 7. Acknowledges patient's
concerns/distress |
0
|
1
|
2
|
| 8. Uses non-coercive/non-judgmental
terms |
0
|
1
|
2
|
| 9. Explicitly requests
patient's views |
0
|
1
|
2
|
| 10. Discusses patient's
objection(s) |
0
|
1
|
2
|
Total mark = 20
Candidate total =
Back to top
|