Dataset Information

How do medical doctors use a web-based oncology protocol system? A comparison of Australian doctors at different levels of medical training using logfile analysis and an online survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Electronic decision support is commonplace in medical practice. However, its adoption at the point-of-care is dependent on a range of organisational, patient and clinician-related factors. In particular, level of clinical experience is an important driver of electronic decision support uptake. Our objective was to examine the way in which Australian doctors at different stages of medical training use a web-based oncology system (http://www.eviq.org.au).

Methods

We used logfiles to examine the characteristics of eviQ registrants (2009-2012) and patterns of eviQ use in 2012, according to level of medical training. We also used a web-based survey to evaluate the way doctors at different levels of medical training use the online system and to elicit perceptions of the system's utility in oncology care.

Results

Our study cohort comprised 2,549 eviQ registrants who were hospital-based medical doctors across all levels of training. 65% of the cohort used eviQ in 2012, with 25% of interns/residents, 61% of advanced oncology trainees and 47% of speciality-qualified oncologists accessing eviQ in the last 3 months of 2012. The cohort accounted for 445,492 webhits in 2012. On average, advanced trainees used eviQ up to five-times more than other doctors (42.6 webhits/month compared to 22.8 for specialty-qualified doctors and 7.4 webhits/month for interns/residents). Of the 52 survey respondents, 89% accessed eviQ's chemotherapy protocols on a daily or weekly basis in the month prior to the survey. 79% of respondents used eviQ at least weekly to initiate therapy and to support monitoring (29%), altering (35%) or ceasing therapy (19%). Consistent with the logfile analysis, advanced oncology trainees report more frequent eviQ use than doctors at other stages of medical training.

Conclusions

The majority of the Australian oncology workforce are registered on eviQ. The frequency of use directly mirrors the clinical role of doctors and attitudes about the utility of eviQ in decision-making. Evaluations of this kind generate important data for system developers and medical educators to drive improvements in electronic decision support to better meet the needs of clinicians. This end-user focus will optimise the uptake of systems which will translate into improvements in processes of care and patient outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Langton JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3750334 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How do medical doctors use a web-based oncology protocol system? A comparison of Australian doctors at different levels of medical training using logfile analysis and an online survey.

Langton Julia M JM Blanch Bianca B Pesa Nicole N Park Jae Min JM Pearson Sallie-Anne SA

BMC medical informatics and decision making 20130804

<h4>Background</h4>Electronic decision support is commonplace in medical practice. However, its adoption at the point-of-care is dependent on a range of organisational, patient and clinician-related factors. In particular, level of clinical experience is an important driver of electronic decision support uptake. Our objective was to examine the way in which Australian doctors at different stages of medical training use a web-based oncology system (http://www.eviq.org.au).<h4>Methods</h4>We used ...[more]

PMID: 23915178

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Globally, online and local area network-based (LAN) digital education (ODE) has grown in popularity. Blended learning is used by ODE along with traditional learning. Studies have shown the increasing potential of these technologies in training medical doctors; however, the evidence for its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is unclear. OBJECTIVE:This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of online and LAN-based ODE in improving practicing medical doctors' knowledge, skills, attitude, satisfaction (primary outcomes), practice or behavior change, patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness (secondary outcomes). METHODS:We searched seven electronic databased for randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized trials, and quasi-randomized trials from January 1990 to March 2017. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We have presented the findings narratively. We mainly compared ODE with self-directed/face-to-face learning and blended learning with self-directed/face-to-face learning. RESULTS:A total of 93 studies (N=16,895) were included, of which 76 compared ODE (including blended) and self-directed/face-to-face learning. Overall, the effect of ODE (including blended) on postintervention knowledge, skills, attitude, satisfaction, practice or behavior change, and patient outcomes was inconsistent and ranged mostly from no difference between the groups to higher postintervention score in the intervention group (small to large effect size, very low to low quality evidence). Twenty-one studies reported higher knowledge scores (small to large effect size and very low quality) for the intervention, while 20 studies reported no difference in knowledge between the groups. Seven studies reported higher skill score in the intervention (large effect size and low quality), while 13 studies reported no difference in the skill scores between the groups. One study reported a higher attitude score for the intervention (very low quality), while four studies reported no difference in the attitude score between the groups. Four studies reported higher postintervention physician satisfaction with the intervention (large effect size and low quality), while six studies reported no difference in satisfaction between the groups. Eight studies reported higher postintervention practice or behavior change for the ODE group (small to moderate effect size and low quality), while five studies reported no difference in practice or behavior change between the groups. One study reported higher improvement in patient outcome, while three others reported no difference in patient outcome between the groups. None of the included studies reported any unintended/adverse effects or cost-effectiveness of the interventions. CONCLUSIONS:Empiric evidence showed that ODE and blended learning may be equivalent to self-directed/face-to-face learning for training practicing physicians. Few other studies demonstrated that ODE and blended learning may significantly improve learning outcomes compared to self-directed/face-to-face learning. The quality of the evidence in these studies was found to be very low for knowledge. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these findings.

Project description:ObjectiveTo understand the association between medical negligence claims and doctors' sex, age, specialty, working hours, work location, personality, social supports, family circumstances, self-rated health, self-rated life satisfaction and presence of recent injury or illness.Design and settingProspective cohort study of Australian doctors.Participants12 134 doctors who completed the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life survey between 2013 and 2019.Primary outcome measureDoctors named as a defendant in a medical negligence claim in the preceding 12 months.Results649 (5.35%) doctors reported being named in a medical negligence claim during the study period. In addition to previously identified demographic factors (sex, age and specialty), we identified the following vocational and psychosocial risk factors for claims: working full time (OR=1.48, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.94) or overtime hours (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.23), working in a regional centre (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.08), increasing job demands (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.30), low self-rated life satisfaction (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.91) and recent serious personal injury or illness (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.72). Having an agreeable personality was mildly protective (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.00). When stratified according to sex, we found that working in a regional area, low self-rated life satisfaction and not achieving work-life balance predicted medical negligence claims in male, but not female, doctors. However, working more than part-time hours and having a recent personal injury or illness predicted medical negligence claims in female, but not male, doctors. Increasing age predicted claims more strongly in male doctors. Personality type predicted claims in both male and female doctors.ConclusionsModifiable risk factors contribute to an increased risk of medical negligence claims among doctors in Australia. Creating more supportive work environments and targeting interventions that improve doctors' health and well-being could reduce the risk of medical negligence claims and contribute to improved patient safety.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the association between medical negligence claims and doctors' self-rated health and life satisfaction.DesignProspective cohort study.ParticipantsRegistered doctors practising in Australia who participated in waves 4 to 11 of the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) longitudinal survey between 2011 and 2018.Primary and secondary outcome measuresSelf-rated health and self-rated life satisfaction.ResultsOf the 15 105 doctors in the study, 885 reported being named in a medical negligence claim. Fixed-effects linear regression analysis showed that both self-rated health and self-rated life satisfaction declined for all doctors over the course of the MABEL survey, with no association between wave and being sued. However, being sued was not associated with any additional declines in self-rated health (coef.=-0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.02, p=0.39) or self-rated life satisfaction (coef.=-0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.07, p=0.91) after controlling for a range of job factors. Instead, we found that working conditions and job satisfaction were the strongest predictors of self-rated health and self-rated life satisfaction in sued doctors. In analyses restricted to doctors who were sued, we observed no changes in self-rated health (p=0.99) or self-rated life satisfaction (p=0.59) in the years immediately following a claim.ConclusionsIn contrast to prior overseas cross-sectional survey studies, we show that medical negligence claims do not adversely affect the well-being of doctors in Australia when adjusting for time trends and previously established covariates. This may be because: (1) prior studies failed to adequately address issues of causation and confounding; or (2) legal processes governing medical negligence claims in Australia cause less distress compared with those in other jurisdictions. Our findings suggest that the interaction between medical negligence claims and poor doctors' health is more complex than revealed through previous studies.

Project description:PurposeCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a global effect on the training of residents of medicine because of what has been required in the pandemic. The field of oncology has not been spared, as prepandemic training schedules have not been available for residents. We conducted an online survey to understand the effect of the pandemic and the effect of online teaching schedules as a measure to help residents of oncology in their training.Methods and materialsAn online survey consisting of 31 questions was sent through various social media platforms based on the training pattern before the onset of COVID-19, effect of the pandemic on educational activities, and the effect of online academic activities on residency training and learning. The survey addressed the need for online academics as an alternate mode of teaching. The survey was left open for a period of 4 weeks with participation requests from the various branches of oncology, including radiation, surgical and medical oncology, onco-anesthesia, palliative oncology, neuro-oncology, and so forth. The frequencies obtained in the survey were analyzed using descriptive statistical analyses.ResultsAfter a 4-week period, there were 255 responses received from students of oncology from various specialties. Around 69.8.1% of respondents (n = 178) were junior residents, followed by senior residents (n = 72; 28.2%). The majority of the respondents were radiation oncologists (n = 204; 80%). Around 70.9% had an ongoing structured teaching program related to oncology training, with the majority (40.3%) of them having more than 3 hours every week of oncology-based training. Another 31.3% reported having 1 to 2 hours of such training every week, and 60.8% of participants agreed their training was affected by pandemic and related safety regulations. Most students (90.9%) found the online teaching sessions helped maintain training qualities as they were in the pre-COVID times. About 69.1% of the students felt that the quality of these online sessions was better compared with the institute-based onsite classroom teaching. However, as is expected, 77.6% of them agreed that their hands-on training was affected in the pandemic. When asked if online teaching can replace every aspect of classroom teaching, 66.7% of respondents did not agree. The majority (83.9%) felt that students should be given the opportunity to present a given topic under the supervision of a senior faculty member experienced and expert in that topic. The students pointed out the lack of practical exposure as the most common deficiency, followed by the lack of direct interaction with the teaching faculty.ConclusionsThe pandemic has limited the access to essential training in the branches of oncology, and though online sessions cannot replace the hands-on training and clinical exposure needed for the students, online academics and webinars have proven to be an effective tool to minimize that effect and can lead to a positive outcome, as shown by the survey. A combination of online and onsite training modules may be the future of teaching and training in our country.

Project description:Despite the proliferation of research on anesthesiology training at all stages of medical education, there is relatively little published literature surveying the perspectives and concerns of anesthesiologists regarding cardiovascular anesthesia training. Therefore, we conducted a survey to investigate the attitudes, barriers, expectations, stress experiences, satisfaction, and future aspirations of anesthesiologists trained at a tertiary cardiovascular specialty hospital in China. A questionnaire survey was conducted among 260 anesthesiologists who received cardiovascular anesthesia training at departments of anesthesiology in a tertiary cardiovascular specialty hospital in China. After the study protocol was approved, electronic questionnaires were distributed to the target group through the online survey software "Wen Juan Xing." Respondents were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire on their smartphones through WeChat, with the restriction of one response per device enabled. Of the 260 trainees, 240 (98%) completed the questionnaire. The majority of the trainees were 31 years of age or above. A large majority had approximately 10 years of clinical anesthesia practice, and nearly one-third had never undertaken cardiovascular specialty anesthesia practice before. The most common reasons for attending the refresher training were the need to learn basic specialty theory and improve clinical skills. The barriers were mainly time constraints or staff shortages in the department. Sixty-one (93.8%) trainees described the experience as "stressful or highly stressful" and identified poor teacher interaction as the highest-ranking stressor. Anesthesiologists were most dissatisfied with job rewards, with a satisfaction rate of only 15%. Anesthesiologists are highly stressed during the refresher training. Poor teacher interaction and low job rewards were identified as the highest-ranking stressors during cardiovascular anesthesia training. Training providers need to pay more attention to these stressors to enhance the quality of cardiovascular anesthesia training.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Web-based self-report surveying has increased in popularity, as it can rapidly yield large samples at a low cost. Despite this increase in popularity, in the area of youth mental health, there is a distinct lack of research comparing the results of Web-based self-report surveys with the more traditional and widely accepted computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI). OBJECTIVE:The Second Australian Young and Well National Survey 2014 sought to compare differences in respondent response patterns using matched items on CATI versus a Web-based self-report survey. The aim of this study was to examine whether responses varied as a result of item sensitivity, that is, the item's susceptibility to exaggeration on underreporting and to assess whether certain subgroups demonstrated this effect to a greater extent. METHODS:A subsample of young people aged 16 to 25 years (N=101), recruited through the Second Australian Young and Well National Survey 2014, completed the identical items on two occasions: via CATI and via Web-based self-report survey. Respondents also rated perceived item sensitivity. RESULTS:When comparing CATI with the Web-based self-report survey, a Wilcoxon signed-rank analysis showed that respondents answered 14 of the 42 matched items in a significantly different way. Significant variation in responses (CATI vs Web-based) was more frequent if the item was also rated by the respondents as highly sensitive in nature. Specifically, 63% (5/8) of the high sensitivity items, 43% (3/7) of the neutral sensitivity items, and 0% (0/4) of the low sensitivity items were answered in a significantly different manner by respondents when comparing their matched CATI and Web-based question responses. The items that were perceived as highly sensitive by respondents and demonstrated response variability included the following: sexting activities, body image concerns, experience of diagnosis, and suicidal ideation. For high sensitivity items, a regression analysis showed respondents who were male (beta=-.19, P=.048) or who were not in employment, education, or training (NEET; beta=-.32, P=.001) were significantly more likely to provide different responses on matched items when responding in the CATI as compared with the Web-based self-report survey. The Web-based self-report survey, however, demonstrated some evidence of avidity and attrition bias. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with CATI, Web-based self-report surveys are highly cost-effective and had higher rates of self-disclosure on sensitive items, particularly for respondents who identify as male and NEET. A drawback to Web-based surveying methodologies, however, includes the limited control over avidity bias and the greater incidence of attrition bias. These findings have important implications for further development of survey methods in the area of health and well-being, especially when considering research topics (in this case diagnosis, suicidal ideation, sexting, and body image) and groups that are being recruited (young people, males, and NEET).

Dataset Information

How do medical doctors use a web-based oncology protocol system? A comparison of Australian doctors at different levels of medical training using logfile analysis and an online survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

How do medical doctors use a web-based oncology protocol system? A comparison of Australian doctors at different levels of medical training using logfile analysis and an online survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets