Incorporation of fellow-driven, interactive case-based discussions to improve fellowship education in a new fellowship program.

Arthi Sridhar The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth Houston) McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX info_outline Arthi Sridhar, Sama Imran Ilyas, Julie H Rowe, Neha Maithel

Authors Arthi Sridhar The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth Houston) McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX info_outline Arthi Sridhar, Sama Imran Ilyas, Julie H Rowe, Neha Maithel Organizations The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth Houston) McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, University of Texas at Houston, Houston, TX, University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Houston, Houston, TX, University of Texas at Houston Health Science Center, Houston, TX Abstract Disclosures Research Funding No funding received None. Background: Evidence-based education is crucial for meeting the evolving needs of learners in the oncology workforce. In this new virtual era, engagement of trainees in educational presentations has become increasingly difficult and reaping the benefits of a conventional didactic learning environment is challenging. Case-based learning is a relatively newer modality that is being used more commonly in teaching programs. In this study, we aimed to incorporate a novel, interactive case-based learning paradigm to improve fundamental knowledge and engagement among oncology trainees. Methods: We conducted six case conferences over 6 months. The case conferences were designed to encourage open discussion of real-life oncology cases. A faculty expert and specific topics were assigned to the presenters: colon, breast, gastric, hepatocellular (HCC), prostate, and non-small cell lung (NSCLC) cancer. Guidelines on the preparation of the case presentation were provided with 5 main pillars: specific staging/workup, first-line management with a landmark trial, second-line management, case-specific challenges, and mechanism of action and monitoring parameters for discussed drugs. Fellows completed a pre- and post-conference survey that assessed their perceived comfort level with the topic, quality of the presentation (post-conference) utilizing the 1–5 Likert scale (5 being extremely satisfied/comfortable), and test questions. Results: Nearly all of the 6 fellows responded to all surveys. The table shows the mean scores given by fellows on the surveys using the Likert scale and the percentage of test questions answered correctly. Overall, the fellows felt that the case conferences were a worthwhile experience. When comparing pre- and post-conference questions, the percentage of test questions correct overall improved for 5 of 6 conferences. Conclusions: The results of our study could have implications for the curriculum planning of hematology/oncology fellowships. Mean scores on pre- and post-conference questionnaires and results for knowledge questions. Topic Pre 1 How comfortable do you feel treating this cancer? Pre 2 How satisfied are you with the didactic education you have received managing this cancer? Po 1 Did you feel this was worth your time? Po 2 This conference added to my fundamental basics Po 3 This training was engaging and interactive Po 4 This presentation accommodated my level of education Pre-Knowledge questions (% correct) Post-Knowledge questions (% correct) Colon 3.2 3 4 3.8 3.8 3.7 45 63 Breast 2.8 3.4 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.6 60 66 Gastric 2.2 2 4.2 4.6 4.2 3.8 46 46 HCC 2.6 3.2 4.2 4.4 4.6 3.8 60 85 NSCLC 3.3 3.3 4.5 4.5 4 4.25 50 67 Prostate 3.4 3.6 4.6 4.6 4.8 5 60 86 Note. Pre- pre-conference, Po- post-conference.