Dataset Information

Assessing the impact of a shadowing programme on in-hospital mortality following trainee doctors' changeover.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To assess the impact on seven-day in-hospital mortality following the introduction in 2012 of a shadowing programme for new UK medical graduates requiring them to observe the doctor they are replacing for at least 4 days before starting work.

Methods

Data on emergency admissions were derived from Hospital Episode Statistics between 2003 and 2019. A generalised estimating equation model was used to examine whether the introduction of the programme was associated with a change in mortality.

Results

There were 644,018 emergency admissions, of which 1.8% (7612) ended in death in hospital within a week following the admission. Throughout the study period, there was an annual increase in the number of emergency admissions during July and August, though in-hospital mortality rates declined. The generalised estimating equation analysis found no significant change in the odds of death within 7 days after admission for patients admitted on the first Wednesday in August compared with patients admitted on the last Wednesday in July (OR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.94-1.13, p = 0.53). Furthermore, there was no significant change observed for any clinical diagnosis category following the introduction of the shadowing programme.

Conclusion

There was a rising trend in the number of emergency admissions over the study period, though mortality was decreasing. We found no significant association between the introduction of shadowing programme and in-hospital mortality; however, lack of power means that we cannot rule out a small effect on mortality. There are other outcomes that might have changed but were not examined in this study.

SUBMITTER: Violeta B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8186218 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Many countries employ strategies that rest on the use of an explicitly defined set of criteria to identify underserved communities. Yet, we know relatively little about the performance of community-level targeting in large-scale health programmes. To address this gap, we examine the performance of community targeting in the More Doctors Programme (MDP). Our analysis covers all 5570 municipalities in the period between 2013 and 2017 using publicly available data. We first calculate the rate at which vulnerable municipalities enrolled in the MDP. Next, we consider two types of mistargeting: (1) proportion of vulnerable municipalities that did not have any MDP physicians (i.e. under-coverage municipalities) and (2) proportion of MDP enrolees that did not fit the vulnerability criteria (i.e. non-target municipalities). We found that almost 70% of vulnerable municipalities received at least one MDP physician between 2013 and 2017; whereas non-target municipalities constituted 33% of beneficiaries. Targeting performance improved over time. Non-target municipalities had the highest levels of socioeconomic development and greater physician availability. The poverty rate among under-coverage municipalities was almost six times that in non-target municipalities. Under-coverage municipalities had the lowest primary care physician availability. They were also smaller and more sparsely populated. We also found small differences in the political party alignments of mayors and the President between under-coverage and non-target municipalities. Our results suggest that using community-level targeting approaches in large-scale health programmes is a complex process. Programmes using these approaches may face substantial challenges in beneficiary targeting. Our results highlight that policymakers who consider using these approaches should carefully study various municipal characteristics that may influence the implementation process, including the level of socioeconomic development, health supply factors, population characteristics and political party alignments.

Project description:Objective: This pilot project, which was jointly conducted by a hospital and a university, describes the development of the Master's Degree Programme in Leadership in Medicine, a course designed to supplement medical specialty training. The aim of the pilot project is to demonstrate how hospital-based projects on personnel and organisational development undertaken under academic supervision can be used to increase leadership responsibility among doctors whose duties include providing initial and follow-on training and to professionalise medical specialty training as a leadership task. This need arose from the nationwide requirements and an internal audit regarding follow-on training. The version of the degree programme described below aims to further the personnel development of the participants in the field of didactics. Method: Each of the nine modules is made up of two classroom-based phases and one distance learning phase. The distance learning phase involves undertaking hospital-based projects on personnel and organisational development under academic supervision. The pilot phase participants were hospital doctors who, as part of their duties, hold leadership responsibility or are involved in the follow-on training of doctors. Results: The 17 participants successfully implemented more than 30 hospital-based projects during the distance learning phases of the nine modules. These projects included the development of medical specialty curricula, relevant didactic methods and evaluation design and were subsequently presented and subjected to reflection in interdisciplinary groups. The project presentation together with the project report were regarded as proof of competency. Conclusion: In addition to enhancing participant competency, the degree model described, which interlinks theory and practice, promotes organisational development through the implementation of projects undertaken under academic supervision. This has a double impact on the quality of medical follow-on training at the hospital where the participant is based, for not only is the individual's didactic competency enhanced, but so is the "learning organisation" as a whole as a result of continuous project orientation.

Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) technologies are increasingly used in clinical practice. Although there is robust evidence that AI innovations can improve patient care, reduce clinicians' workload and increase efficiency, their impact on medical training and education remains unclear.MethodsA survey of trainee doctors' perceived impact of AI technologies on clinical training and education was conducted at UK NHS postgraduate centers in London between October and December 2020. Impact assessment mirrored domains in training curricula such as 'clinical judgement', 'practical skills' and 'research and quality improvement skills'. Significance between Likert-type data was analysed using Fisher's exact test. Response variations between clinical specialities were analysed using k-modes clustering. Free-text responses were analysed by thematic analysis.ResultsTwo hundred ten doctors responded to the survey (response rate 72%). The majority (58%) perceived an overall positive impact of AI technologies on their training and education. Respondents agreed that AI would reduce clinical workload (62%) and improve research and audit training (68%). Trainees were skeptical that it would improve clinical judgement (46% agree, p = 0.12) and practical skills training (32% agree, p < 0.01). The majority reported insufficient AI training in their current curricula (92%), and supported having more formal AI training (81%).ConclusionsTrainee doctors have an overall positive perception of AI technologies' impact on clinical training. There is optimism that it will improve 'research and quality improvement' skills and facilitate 'curriculum mapping'. There is skepticism that it may reduce educational opportunities to develop 'clinical judgement' and 'practical skills'. Medical educators should be mindful that these domains are protected as AI develops. We recommend that 'Applied AI' topics are formalized in curricula and digital technologies leveraged to deliver clinical education.

Project description:BackgroundThe amount of information needed by doctors has exploded. The nature of knowledge (explicit and tacit) and processes of knowledge acquisition and participation are complex. Aiming to assist workplace learning, Wales Deanery funded "iDoc", a project offering trainee doctors a Smartphone library of medical textbooks.MethodsData on trainee doctors' (Foundation Year 2) workplace information seeking practice was collected by questionnaire in 2011 (n = 260). iDoc baseline questionnaires (n = 193) collected data on Smartphone usage alongside other workplace information sources. Case reports (n = 117) detail specific instances of Smartphone use.ResultsMost frequently (daily) used information sources in the workplace: senior medical staff (80% F2 survey; 79% iDoc baseline); peers (70%; 58%); and other medical/nursing team staff (53% both datasets). Smartphones were used more frequently by males (p < 0.01). Foundation Year 1 (newly qualified) was judged the most useful time to have a Smartphone library because of increased responsibility and lack of knowledge/experience.Preferred information source varied by question type: hard copy texts for information-based questions; varied resources for skills queries; and seniors for more complex problems. Case reports showed mobile technology used for simple (information-based), complex (problem-based) clinical questions and clinical procedures (skills-based scenarios). From thematic analysis, the Smartphone library assisted: teaching and learning from observation; transition from medical student to new doctor; trainee doctors' discussions with seniors; independent practice; patient care; and this 'just-in-time' access to reliable information supported confident and efficient decision-making.ConclusionA variety of information sources are used regularly in the workplace. Colleagues are used daily but seniors are not always available. During transitions, constant access to the electronic library was valued. It helped prepare trainee doctors for discussions with their seniors, assisting the interchange between explicit and tacit knowledge.By supporting accurate prescribing and treatment planning, the electronic library contributed to enhanced patient care. Trainees were more rapidly able to medicate patients to reduce pain and more quickly call for specific assessments. However, clinical decision-making often requires dialogue: what Smartphone technology can do is augment, not replace, discussion with their colleagues in the community of practice.