Ately filling a weekly pill box). A modified version was implemented
Ately filling a weekly pill box). A modified version was implemented, as described THS-044 previously (Chen et al 20). In short, students initially had been asked to choose 3 personal traits from a list they wished to have as an older adult (e.g energetic, goodlooking, fantastic memory). Then, students have been randomly assigned simulated physical disabilities (e.g vision loss, hearing loss, dexterity loss, difficulty with balance, basic disability, or mobility loss). By way of example, students who had vision loss received petroleum jellycoated goggles. Students also were assigned monetary status (high, middle, and low income) and offered “health credits” accordingly to spend for copays (Chen et al 20; Oliver et al 995). Next, students had been asked to navigate a simulated healthcare program with six different stations: physician’s office, pharmacy, nurse practitioner, laboratory tests and healthcare positive aspects, dwelling, and activities (activities of day-to-day living and instrumental activities of every day living, which include buttoning up a shirt or opening a food package). At every station, students drew a card that gave them a brand new station to pay a visit to, added a brand new illness or medication, or asked them to carry out an activity, such as reciting their medication list. Equivalent for the healthcare program, healthcare professionals displayed PubMed ID:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26094900 varying levels of empathy and caring, and students had to “wait” in line to see a healthcare provider. Also, although students have been waiting, “fate” (played by a facilitator) visited them and could take away or add individual characteristics, diseases, disabilities, or medicines (Chen et al 20; Oliver et al 995). No student essentially “won” the GMG, but all students engaged within a reflective using the facilitator at the end with the GMG. This permitted the facilitator to identify and discuss any misperceptions with regards to older adults (e.g not all older adults are disabled) and also the healthcare method (Chen et al 20). Station facilitators and “fate” had been nursing and pharmacy faculty members and graduate students. General GMG facilitators have been the study researchers. Nursing students enrolled in a sophomorelevel clinical course focusing on the care of older adults participated in a threehour GMG as part of course activities. Students completed survey instruments (KiersmaChen Empathy Scale Jefferson Scale of Empathy Wellness Professions Students, and Aging Simulation Knowledge Survey before beginning the expertise laboratory to ascertain baseline empathy and attitudes towards older adults, and their understanding of the healthcare system. Students also completed the instruments afterNIHPA Author Manuscript NIHPA Author Manuscript NIHPA Author ManuscriptNurse Educ Today. Author manuscript; available in PMC 206 January 0.Chen et al.Pageparticipating within the GMG to measure alterations. An anonymous identifier was utilised to link the pre and posttests.NIHPA Author Manuscript NIHPA Author Manuscript NIHPA Author ManuscriptMeasures Student empathy was measured applying the KiersmaChen Empathy Scale (KCES), a newlyvalidated measure of empathy and a standard measure of student empathy, the Jefferson Scale of Empathy Overall health Professional Students (JSEHPS). The JSEHPS measures empathic qualities and tendencies and was modified from the Jefferson Scale of Empathy to consist of overall health profession students. This scale contains 20 things (7point Likerttype, Strongly Disagree, 7Strongly Agree), with 0 things negativelyworded (which were reversecoded when scored) (Fields et al 20; Hojat et al 2002; Ho.