Dataset Information

Do educational interventions improve prescribing by medical students and junior doctors? A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Our aim was to review systematically the literature on educational interventions to improve prescribing by medical students and junior doctors. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Educational Resource Information Center, British Education Index, PsycINFO, CINAHL, TIMELIT, Cochrane Trials Database and grey literature were searched. Inclusion criteria were: educational interventions to improve medical student and/or junior doctors' prescribing, in primary or secondary care settings, and published after 1990. After screening 3189 records, we retrieved 11 controlled and four 'before-and-after' trials. Ten controlled trials showed improvements in the scores of the intervention group on written scenarios or clinical examination stations, but one study in junior doctors showed no effect on real-life prescription errors. Only one intervention [the World Health Organization (WHO) Good Prescribing Guide, in six randomized trials] had been tested in a variety of international settings and across a range of students at different levels. All four 'before-and-after' trials reported significant improvements in written tests or clinical stations. However, most studies tested only small numbers of participants and were affected by a range of methodological flaws. There is only moderate evidence in the literature to inform medical schools about how to prepare medical students for the challenges of prescribing. The WHO Good Prescribing Guide is the only model that has been widely used and shown to improve prescribing. Although it is based on sound principles, there is a need for further development. Robust methods of assessment are required to show clearly whether particular teaching interventions are successful.

SUBMITTER: Ross S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2723206 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do educational interventions improve prescribing by medical students and junior doctors? A systematic review.

Ross Sarah S Loke Yoon K YK

British journal of clinical pharmacology 20090601 6

Our aim was to review systematically the literature on educational interventions to improve prescribing by medical students and junior doctors. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Educational Resource Information Center, British Education Index, PsycINFO, CINAHL, TIMELIT, Cochrane Trials Database and grey literature were searched. Inclusion criteria were: educational interventions to improve medical student and/or junior doctors' prescribing, in primary or secondary care settings, and published after 1990. After s ...[more]

PMID: 19594535

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo review the literature on educational interventions to improve prescribing and identify educational methods that improve prescribing competency in both medical and non-medical prescribers.DesignA systematic review was conducted. The databases Medline, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), EMBASE and CINAHL were searched for articles in English published between January 1990 and July 2013.SettingPrimary and secondary care.ParticipantsMedical and non-medical prescribers.InterventionEducation-based interventions to aid improvement in prescribing competency.Primary outcomeImprovements in prescribing competency (knows how) or performance (shows how) as defined by Miller's competency model. This was primarily demonstrated through prescribing examinations, changes in prescribing habits or adherence to guidelines.ResultsA total of 47 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. Studies were categorised by their method of assessment, with 20 studies assessing prescribing competence and 27 assessing prescribing performance. A wide variety of educational interventions were employed, with different outcome measures and methods of assessments. In particular, six studies demonstrated that specific prescribing training using the WHO Guide to Good Prescribing increased prescribing competency in a wide variety of settings. Continuing medical education in the form of academic detailing and personalised prescriber feedback also yielded positive results. Only four studies evaluated educational interventions targeted at non-medical prescribers, highlighting that further research is needed in this area.ConclusionsA broad range of educational interventions have been conducted to improve prescribing competency. The WHO Guide to Good Prescribing has the largest body of evidence to support its use and is a promising model for the design of targeted prescribing courses. There is a need for further development and evaluation of educational methods for non-medical prescribers.

Project description:Introduction: A compassionate and patient-centered care leads to improved clinical outcomes. Promoting empathy and compassion of medical students is a forerunner of their well-being, emotional stability, and a patient-centered care. However, there is slender evidence about best educational interventions that can inculcate empathy and compassion skills. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of research evaluating the associations between spectrum, effectiveness, frequency of teaching modalities and their outcomes on compassion and empathy to highlight best practices. Methods: We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCO Host on 22nd July 2020. We adapted our search strategy from a previously published systematic review on education for compassion and empathy. Selected studies were required to have used unique educational interventions for promoting empathy and compassion of medical students. The research questions were based on Participants (medical students), Intervention (empathy and/or compassion related teaching), Comparison, and Outcome. Results: We analyzed 24 articles from the initial yield of 2,861. Twenty-two were quantitative studies with a mean of 12.8 on MERSQI. Twelve were randomized controlled trials while 5 measured outcomes with single group pre- and post-tests. There was no association found between duration, frequency and complexity of an educational intervention and its effectiveness. Twenty used multimodality curricula, and of those 18 reported statistically significant positive improvement in empathy, while 3 of 4 single modality were effective. Only three studies looked for long-term effects of educational interventions. Fourteen studies evaluated Kirkpatrick's level one (self-reported knowledge), 2 level three (behavior), and 6 level four (patient outcomes). We identified six major educational constructs of teaching empathy and compassion; communication, mindfulness, early clinical exposure, technology-enhanced learning, comics and arts and culture. Discussion: Our review couldn't identify a standard teaching construct in place and highlighted that different teaching tools carry similar impact in promoting compassion and empathy and a sustainable program rather than a single training activity is essential.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Compliance to hygiene behaviours has long been recognised as important in the prevention and control of healthcare associated infections, but medical doctors still display some of the lowest rates of compliance of all healthcare workers. We aim to understand compliance to hygiene behaviours by analysing medical students', junior doctors' and medical educators' narratives of these behaviours to identify their respective attitudes and beliefs around compliance and how these are learnt during training. Such an understanding can inform future interventions to improve compliance targeted to areas of greatest need. DESIGN:A qualitative study, using narrative interviews (nine focus groups and one individual interview). Data were analysed thematically using inductive framework analysis. SETTING:Teaching hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS:Convenience sample of 25 participants: third-year medical students in their first clinical year (n=13), junior doctors (n=6) and medical educators (n=6). RESULTS:We identified four main themes: (1) knowledge, (2) constraints, (3) role models/culture and (4) hygiene as an added extra. Knowledge varied across participant groups and appeared to influence behaviours; medical students relied on what they have been told by seniors, while medical educators relied on their own knowledge and experience. There was a strong belief that evidence for the effectiveness of good hygiene behaviours is lacking. Furthermore, medical educators' behaviour appears to strongly influence others. Finally, hygiene was predominately viewed as an added extra rather than an integral part of the process. CONCLUSIONS:Awareness of the evidence around good hygiene needs to be improved at all levels. Medical students and junior doctors should be encouraged to consider why they are asked to perform certain hygiene behaviours in order to improve ownership of those behaviours. Medical educators need to recognise their responsibilities as role models for their junior counterparts, thereby understanding their role in developing the culture of hygiene practices within their clinical domains.

Project description:BackgroundOveruse of antibiotics has contributed to antimicrobial resistance; a growing public health threat. In long-term care facilities, levels of inappropriate prescribing are as high as 75%. Numerous interventions targeting long-term care facilities' antimicrobial stewardship have been reported with varying, and largely unexplained, effects. Therefore, this review aimed to apply behavioural science frameworks to specify the component behaviour change techniques of stewardship interventions in long-term care facilities and identify those components associated with improved outcomes.MethodA systematic review (CRD42018103803) was conducted through electronic database searches. Two behavioural science frameworks, the Behaviour Change Wheel and Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy were used to classify intervention descriptions into intervention types and component behaviour change techniques used. Study design and outcome heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis and meta-regression. Interventions were categorised as 'very promising' (all outcomes statistically significant), 'quite promising' (some outcomes statistically significant), or 'not promising' (no outcomes statistically significant). 'Promise ratios' (PR) were calculated for identified intervention types and behaviour change techniques by dividing the number of (very or quite) promising interventions featuring the intervention type or behaviour change technique by the number of interventions featuring the intervention type or behaviour change technique that were not promising. Promising intervention types and behaviour change techniques were defined as those with a PR ≥ 2.ResultsTwenty studies (of19 interventions) were included. Seven interventions (37%) were 'very promising', eight 'quite promising' (42%) and four 'not promising' (21%). Most promising intervention types were 'persuasion' (n = 12; promise ratio (PR) = 5.0), 'enablement' (n = 16; PR = 4.33) and 'education' (n = 19; PR = 3.75). Most promising behaviour change techniques were 'feedback on behaviour' (n = 9; PR = 8.0) and 'restructuring the social environment' (e.g. staff role changes; n = 8; PR = 7.0).ConclusionSystematic identification of the active ingredients of antimicrobial stewardship in long-term care facilities was facilitated through the application of behavioural science frameworks. Incorporating environmental restructuring and performance feedback may be promising intervention strategies for antimicrobial stewardship interventions within long-term care facilities.

Project description:Health information is readily accessible but is of variable quality. General knowledge about how to assess whether claims about health interventions are trustworthy is not common, so people's health decisions can be ill-informed, unnecessarily costly and even unsafe. This review aims to identify and evaluate studies of educational interventions designed to improve people's understanding of key concepts for evaluating claims about the effects of health interventions.We searched multiple electronic databases and sources of grey literature. Inclusion criteria included all study types that included a comparison, any participants (except health professionals or health professional students) and educational interventions aimed at improving people's understanding of one or more of the key concepts considered necessary for assessing health intervention claims. Knowledge and/or understanding of concepts or skills relevant to evaluating health information were our primary outcome measures. Secondary outcomes included behaviour, confidence, attitude and satisfaction with the educational interventions. Two authors independently screened search results, assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. Results were summarised using descriptive synthesis.Among 24 eligible studies, 14 were randomised trials and 10 used other study designs. There was heterogeneity across study participants, settings and educational intervention type, content and delivery. The risk of bias was high in at least one domain for all randomised studies. Most studies measured outcomes immediately after the educational intervention, with few measuring later. In most of the comparisons, measures of knowledge and skills were better among those who had received educational interventions than among controls, and some of these differences were statistically significant. The effects on secondary outcomes were inconsistent.Educational interventions to improve people's understanding of key concepts for evaluating health intervention claims can improve people's knowledge and skills, at least in the short term. Effects on confidence, attitude and behaviour are uncertain. Many of the studies were at moderate or greater risk of bias. Improvements in study quality, consistency of outcome measures and measures of longer-term effects are needed to improve confidence in estimates of the effects of educational interventions to improve people's understanding of key concepts for evaluating health intervention claims.PROSPERO CRD42016033103.

Dataset Information

Do educational interventions improve prescribing by medical students and junior doctors? A systematic review.

Publications

Do educational interventions improve prescribing by medical students and junior doctors? A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets