Teaching SSHADESS Versus HEADSS to Medical Students: An Association With Improved Communication Skills and Increased...

The most recent Bright Futures edition describes both the HEADSS (Home, Education, Drugs, Sexuality, Safety) and the strength-based SSHADESS (Strengths, School, Home, Activities, Drugs, Emotions, Sexuality, Safety) frameworks for conducting an adolescent psychosocial history. We found limited research comparing the effectiveness of these 2 frameworks. Our study objective was to examine whether teaching medical students SSHADESS versus HEADSS is associated with increased communication skills and/or completion of the psychosocial assessment.

In this retrospective cohort study of pediatric clerkship students at New York University Grossman School of Medicine, we collected data from observer (faculty, fellow, and resident) and standardized patient (SP) assessments during Objective Structured Clinical Examinations. Primary outcomes were observer and SP-rated usage of communication skills. Secondary outcomes were observer-rated assessment of 6 psychosocial factors. Our predictor variable was whether students were taught HEADSS (11/2015-10/2016) or SSHADESS (11/2016-10/2017). We used Fisher's exact tests and then logistic regressions to adjust for pediatrics clerkship timing and baseline communication skills.

About 200 students were assessed (n = 97 HEADSS cohort, n = 103 SSHADESS cohort). In adjusted analyses of observer scores, the SSHADESS cohort was more likely to use all communication skills (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-6.3]) and assess all psychosocial factors (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.01-3.4). There was no significant difference in SP communication scores.

Teaching SSHADESS was associated with higher observer-rated communication skills scores and improved completeness in assessment of psychosocial factors. Future work should examine the efficacy of SSHADESS through workplace-based assessments and 360 degree assessments from adolescent patients.