Interviews were conducted with 14 participants eliciting a total of 45 discrete NMLs that occurred in a variety of clinical and non-clinical settings [7]. Our analyses identified the personal, interpersonal and systemic affordances that supported or hindered learning within each NML. We acknowledge that there may be some overlap between these levels or they may be difficult to untangle. For simplicity, we will first present an overview of the affordances at different levels (Tab. 1), followed by exemplars from our participant narratives (Tab. 2). Then we set out longer vignettes to showcase the interplay between personal, interpersonal and systemic affordances within an NML and their influence on emerging professional identity [6].
Table 1 Levels of affordances in narratives of memorable learning Table 2 Exemplars of factors supporting or constraining learning at personal, interpersonal and systemic levels Personal factors included past experience, dispositions, knowledge, skill, beliefs and emotions. Interpersonal influences included relationships and interactions co-created with others. Systemic conditions included the structures of healthcare and educational institutions and workplaces wherein memorable learning happened. Within discrete NMLs, elements supporting or hindering learning were present in ways that aligned along personal, interpersonal and systemic levels to fully support learning as becoming or collided resulting in confusion or mixed messages.
Personal factors
Past involvement with death and dying enabled palliative care learning: in formal medical education, in previous domains of study or careers and in personal life experience. The consequences of these experiences for participants were described as increased understanding of the concept of palliative care, more comfort and confidence to participate in care of the dying and a sense of personal meaning derived from the work. An individual disposition towards actively engaging in defining learning needs, seeking learning opportunities and accessing both human (the interprofessional team) and formal curricular (books, tutorials, online tools) resources for palliative care supported learning. In contrast, lack of or negative past experience with palliative care as a concept and a practice were identified as personal barriers to learning. More globally, feeling fatigued and burnt-out during residency training interfered with learning.
Interpersonal influences
Positive relationships with colleagues, interprofessional team members, supervising physicians, patients and families were frequently identified as factors enabling learning. This supported effective communication, relationship building and a holistic approach to care. Having positive mentors, role models and supervisors, and observing their participation in the workplace supported learning and contributed to creating positive learning environments. Positive relationships outside of the workplace, such as close friends and family members with whom participants could reflect upon their work and its personal repercussions, were identified as strategies that supported learning. Lack of perceived support from supervisors, colleagues or other team members interfered with learning. Reasons for this included lack of time and interest by team members, a focus on acute curative care and differing points of view that were not resolved. Communication challenges were described as a result of language and cultural barriers, uncertainty about a patient’s history and disease trajectory, difficult family dynamics and high emotional tone.
Systemic conditions
Systemic enablers to learning were described as having well-structured and well-scheduled opportunities to participate in clinical palliative care, both core and elective, in hospitals, residential hospices, outpatient clinics and homes. Resources that enabled these clinical experiences were: time to spend with patients and families; formal curricular elements such as books, tutorials and on-line tools; access to community-based interprofessional teams; and access to in-hospital specialist palliative care teams. Having continuity with patients and families along the illness trajectory supported learning. Conversely, lack of identified palliative care opportunities in primary care practices, specialist rotations or in specialized palliative care units hindered learning. Lack of time to spend with patients and families, particularly around unexpected or catastrophic changes, and multiple competing demands due to the nature of clinical rotations and scheduling interfered with learning. Several participants remarked on the absence of any home-based care during their medical education and how this was a barrier to learning to practice community-based palliative care. Within some tertiary care settings, fragmentation of care or the requirement to transfer patient care to a specialized palliative care team with subsequent loss of continuity was identified as a barrier to learning.
Interplay of factors at multiple levels and the emergence of professional identity
We illustrate three vignettes that highlight how factors at multiple level align, misalign or collide within an NML influencing professional identity. Participant 7 (Infobox 1), an individual with prior experiences of death and dying, described taking up affordances within the environment such as actively engaging in defining learning needs, seeking learning opportunities, and accessing both human (the interprofessional team) and formal curricular resources (books, tutorials, online tools) for palliative care. In contrast, for Participant 5, lack of past experience with palliative care as a concept and a practice were identified as personal barriers interfering with learning. In other NMLs this resulted in lack of confidence and feeling overwhelmed and uncertain about being able to engage in this practice in the future. For Participant 5, this personal barrier was offset by interpersonal and systemic conditions supporting learning (Infobox 2). Confusion resulted when an individual with positive personal experiences of death and dying confronted interpersonal and/or systemic challenges to participating in this care that were overwhelming (Infobox 3).
Vignette 1: Alignment personal, interpersonal, systemic levels: harmony
Participant 7 described her familiarity with palliative care, recalling the physician who cared for her grandfather and describing previous palliative care learning (formal and workplace). These personal and systemic factors supported her emerging identity for palliative care practice. She further describes multiple positive interpersonal factors supporting her within the NML: interactions with interprofessional colleagues and family members. She was afforded and seized the opportunity for meaningful engagement. This enabled her to deal with uncertainty and emotions and opened a reflective space. She narrates her story as an active care provider for this dying man and his family.
Box 1 Vignette 1
“… [Palliative care nurse] gives some good lectures… She does a lot of good teaching… The other way [I learned about palliative care] was definitely the hospice experience … I was on the [hospital] service, [and there was] an elderly guy … he wasn’t doing well at home, and then all of the sudden I got called that he was having trouble breathing … he got drowsier and drowsier and he was starting to fatigue and I called his family and told them to come in and then had to kind of on the fly … try to remember what kind of medications you give cause he wasn’t going to continue this way for very long. … I called palliative care on call just to ask them … what medications they would give or what doses … to just make sure he was comfortable … The family didn’t make it in time. They came in and he had already passed … We had a really good conversation with them afterwards … we all just talked about the patient and his life and what had happened … it had been quite unexpected … I think so much of what they’ll remember about [that] night … is going to be the conversation that they had with me and the nurse … everyone should have the right to die with dignity … [I was able] to actually do something pretty nice for someone. Like I still remember the doctor who took care of my grandfather when he was passing away.” Participant 7
… denotes text edited for brevity
Vignette 2: Misalignment personal, interpersonal, systemic levels: satisfaction
Participant 5 had no experience with palliative care during his undergraduate medical education and although he heard about this practice through classmates, he was uncertain about what it was and what it entailed. Thus, he arrived at his first clinical palliative care experience as a postgraduate trainee. Despite his uncertainty and lack of confidence, he was curious and self-directed and was able to establish relationships with patient, family and team members to fully participate in this care. The structure of the workplace and schedule allowed him time to overcome these barriers, engage his curiosity, deal with uncertainty, and fully participate in the care of this man and his family. This resulted in memorable learning, satisfaction, and his presentation as someone capable of engaging in this care.
Box 2 Vignette 2
“In med school I had no palliative care exposure. It was a selective that I didn’t know anything about, and I didn’t really get exposed to it … I was called on a weekend in first year residency … to do an admission to [the hospice] and I remember thinking, … this is not good because I don’t even know where to start … so I was doing some reading and I was talking to the family and then when I talked to my staff it became apparent that I didn’t even really have an approach to palliative care. … and [the attending physician] was great. We spent probably half hour on the phone talking about everything that I needed to make sure I covered … he was so clear that like he wanted me to feel independent in dealing with this and would definitely come in if I felt it was necessary … I really liked that independence and I liked the guidance that he gave me … I spent several hours … coming up with the plan, talking with the nurses, making sure the orders were correct and making sure that there was a plan in place … I felt proud of myself that I had made it through that experience and had a good rapport with the patient and was able to call [the attending physician] and talk about my plan, and tweak it a little bit and felt like … I ’ve definitely learned something here today.” Participant 5
Vignette 3: Collision of personal, interpersonal, systemic levels: dissonance
Participant 13 described herself as someone who is familiar with palliative care from several perspectives: family, past jobs and her previous health profession. Her NML is a dramatic story of challenging interpersonal interactions with a family in crisis, exacerbated by systemic factors of multiple responsibilities while on duty. Despite her personal disposition and awareness of palliative care practice, the need to comply with the pervasive systemic challenges and resulting unresolved emotions caused frustration. She described feeling conflicted and compromised about how she aspired to be and to act in this interaction, asking, ‘how is this ok?’. The sociocultural factors in this NML collide with her individual dispositions. While she presents herself as a caring and compassionate person, the conditions under which she was working did not allow her to express nor resolve this. The result is confusion about who she is and how she acted in this circumstance.
Box 3 Vignette 3
“… Before medicine I [was a heath professional] … in that practice … I was exposed to palliative care … [a family member] used to be a palliative care nurse … I remember her speaking about it. I used to be a [previous job] on the oncology floor … so it’s been around me … I received [a call] to go down to the emergency department to see a woman who had just been told that she had metastatic disease and that she … was full of cancer all over her body and I was to go share this with her … it was like two o ’clock in the morning and I was in charge of like ten women who were laboring and I go downstairs to the [emergency department]. All of her kids are around her, and I had to share this with her and then my pager went off. And all of the kids had different reactions. Some were sobbing, some were crying, some were yelling at me … and I was really trying hard to communicate … and just to … say … ‘I really don’t have much time.’ … I just felt very frustrated because I got called [away]. Then I had to leave. And I felt like that family was just left … in the dust and … and I felt as though, ‘How is that okay?’ … I was never allowed really … well I was never … able to go back and to see that family in the emergency department again … because it was just so crazy … so I felt quite conflicted inside …”. Participant 13