Search

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • Junior doctors feel poorly prepared by their training in Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics and commonly make prescribing errors. • Since 1993 the General Medical Council's guidance on undergraduate medical education ‘Tomorrow's Doctors’ has emphasized the integration of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics teaching within the medical curriculum. • With the publication of a new version of Tomorrow's Doctors in 2009, medical schools will be further revising their Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics teaching. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS • Although we know what the recommendations for undergraduate teaching of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics teaching are, there are no published data describing what is currently happening in UK medical schools. • This paper describes the course structures, volume and range of teaching and assessment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics in the UK in 2009. • Our data provide a foundation for schools looking to revise the Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Teaching in the light of Tomorrow's Doctors 2009. AIM To describe the current structure, delivery and assessment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (CPT) teaching in UK medical schools. METHODS An online questionnaire was distributed to the person with overall responsibility for CPT teaching at all UK medical schools in June 2009. RESULTS Thirty of the 32 UK medical schools responded. 60% of schools have a CPT course although in 72% this was an integrated vertical theme. At 70% of schools pharmacologists have overall responsibility for CPT teaching (clinical 67%, non-clinical 33%); at 20% teaching is run by a non-specialist clinician and at 7% by a pharmacist. Teaching is commonly delivered by NHS clinicians (87%) and clinical pharmacists (80%) using lectures (90%) but additionally 50% of schools use e-Learning and 63% have a student formulary. CPT is assessed throughout the curriculum at many schools through written, practical examinations and course work. 90% of schools have specific CPT content in their written examinations. 90% of respondents believed that their students were ‘fairly’ to ‘well’ prepared for the foundation year but only 37% of schools gather data on the competence of their graduates. CONCLUSIONS CPT teaching in UK medical schools is very diverse. Most schools do not assess the performance of their graduates as prescribers and there is a lack of evidence that many of the teaching approaches employed are suitable for the development of prescribing skills. It is vital that developments in CPT teaching are driven by validated, real-world assessments of the prescribing skills of medical students and newly qualified doctors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction In 1996 the University of Liverpool introduced an integrated problem-based learning (PBL) medical curriculum incorporating the recommendations of Tomorrow's Doctors. This paper investigates whether the PRHO (pre-registration house officer) educational supervisors who supervise Liverpool graduates believe that the reformed curriculum is producing house officers who have the competencies outlined by the General Medical Council. Methods Forty-one interviews were arranged with a sample of educational supervisors in the Mersey Deanery area to ascertain their views on the competencies of Liverpool PRHOs. The interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed and analysed. Results The supervisors felt that the PRHOs had been well prepared to work as PRHOs, and compared with traditional graduates they were actually better prepared for the job of PRHO. They saw the PRHOs as competent communicators with improved clinical skills, who had good attitudes, were aware of limitations, were team workers, good at history-taking and examination and had different approaches to finding information. There was a very confusing picture regarding basic knowledge, with some consultants expressing concerns, despite saying they had adequate knowledge to work as PRHOs. It emerged that there was little consensus about the knowledge base of the traditional or PBL graduates or what knowledge level was needed at this stage. Discussion Educational supervisors believe that the reformed curriculum in Liverpool is producing competent PRHOs who have been better prepared for the role of PRHO than previous graduates. It could be that uncertainty over knowledge base may be the price paid for reducing the factual burden and improving preparedness for professional practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies raise concerns over the preparedness of newly qualified doctors for the role of the pre-registration house officer (PRHO). This study aimed to assess self-perception of preparedness, objective assessment of core clinical skills and the effect of an extended clinical induction programme prior to commencing full duties. A group of 26 newly qualified doctors from 1 district general hospital underwent an extended 5-day, ward-based induction programme. The participants completed questionnaires on their own perceptions of their preparedness for PRHO duties and underwent an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) of 4 core clinical skills prior to induction, on completion of induction and 1 month into working life. At the outset PRHOs had low perceptions of their own capabilities in all clinical scenarios and skills. Most perceptions improved after induction, although in 2 clinical areas they felt even less confident. One month into post there were significant improvements in all areas. Only 1 PRHO passed all 4 clinical skills assessments at the pre-induction assessment. Seven (26%) failed on 1 or more skills at the post-induction assessment. However, all participants were deemed competent in all skills at the 1-month assessment. Newly qualified doctors do not feel prepared for PRHO duties and objectively are not competent in basic clinical skills. An extended induction improves preparedness in some but not all clinical areas and improves performance of objectively assessed clinical skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]