These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: An integrated undergraduate pain curriculum, based on IASP curricula, for six health science faculties.
    Author: Watt-Watson J, Hunter J, Pennefather P, Librach L, Raman-Wilms L, Schreiber M, Lax L, Stinson J, Dao T, Gordon A, Mock D, Salter M.
    Journal: Pain; 2004 Jul; 110(1-2):140-8. PubMed ID: 15275761.
    Abstract:
    Pain education, especially for undergraduates, has been identified as important to changing problematic pain practices, yet, no published data were found describing an integrated, interprofessional pain curriculum for undergraduate students. Therefore, this project aimed to develop, implement, and evaluate an integrated pain curriculum, based on the International Association for the Study of Pain curricula [http://www.iasp-pain.org/curropen.html], for 540 students from six Health Science Faculties/Departments. Over an 18-month period, the University of Toronto Centre for the Study of Pain's Interfaculty Pain Education Committee developed a 20-h undergraduate pain curriculum to be delivered during a 1-week period. Students from Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, Physical Therapy, and Occupational Therapy participated as part of their 2nd or 3rd year program. Teaching strategies included large and small groups, Standardized Patients, and 63 facilitators. Evaluation methods included: (a) pre- and post-tests of the Pain Knowledge and Beliefs Questionnaire (PKBQ) and (b) Daily Content and Process Questionnaire (DCPQ) to obtain feedback about process, content, and format across the curriculum's 5 days. A significant improvement in pain knowledge and beliefs was demonstrated (t = 181.28, P < 0.001), although non-responders were problematic at the post-test. DCPQ overall ratings of 'exceeding or meeting expectations' ranged from 74 to 92%. Ratings were highest for the patient-related content and panel, and the small-group discussions with Standardized Patients. Overall evaluations were positive, and statistically significant changes were demonstrated in students' pain knowledge and beliefs. This unique and valuable learning opportunity will be repeated with some modifications next year.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]