ota atsuhiko

This pre–post study aimed to determine whether interprofessional education (IPE) combining online and in-person instruction enhanced medical students’ empathy. The IPE program was conducted during the academic years 2022 and 2023 for medical (n = 240) and other healthcare students. Subjects discussed a case scenario involving a patient with chronic myeloid leukemia, sharing their ideas within their team and with other teams. The medical students’ empathy was assessed before and after the IPE program using the Japanese version of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy for Health Professions Students (JSE-HPS). Medical students provided written responses to the question, “What do you think is necessary for the care of patients with cancer, besides medical skills and knowledge?” Empathy-related terms were identified using frequency and co-occurrence analyses. The frequencies before and after the IPE were compared. The median JSE-HPS score rose from 98.0 to 114.0 (p < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). The frequency of words categorized as demonstrating empathy increased from 37.9% to 52.9% after the IPE (p < 0.01, chi-square test). Our hybrid IPE program enhanced medical students’ empathy, which was supported by both quantitative and qualitative methods.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to (1) identify distinct multidimensional fatigue profiles among employed cancer survivors, (2) examine associations between workplace factors and these profiles, and (3) assess how these profiles are associated with occupational outcomes. METHODS: Seventy-two employed cancer survivors aged 27 to 64 years (median 9.4 years since diagnosis) from a local government in Japan completed questionnaires in 2023 assessing cancer-related fatigue (Cancer Fatigue Scale), workplace factors (job demands, job control, workplace support), and occupational outcomes (work engagement, presenteeism, cognitive function at work, and quality of life). Fatigue profiles were identified using hierarchical cluster analysis. Associations between workplace factors and profiles were examined using multinomial logistic regression. Occupational outcome differences among profiles were examined using linear regression. RESULTS: Three profiles were identified: Low Global Fatigue (n = 12), Dominant Mental Fatigue (n = 36), and High Global Fatigue (n = 24). Workplace support-particularly supervisor understanding, colleague understanding, and schedule flexibility-was associated with approximately 75% lower odds of belonging to the High Global Fatigue group. Job demands and job control showed no associations. The High Global Fatigue group reported lower work engagement, higher presenteeism, reduced cognitive function at work, and poorer quality of life compared to the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Three multidimensional fatigue profiles were identified among employed cancer survivors. Workplace support factors were more strongly associated with fatigue profiles than job characteristics. These profiles were associated with occupational outcomes. IMPLICATION FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These distinct fatigue profiles can guide personalized workplace interventions to optimize support for employed cancer survivors.