Search

The development of adolescent health and medicine as a medical discipline lags behind in Europe compared with other regions of the world. This study aims to evaluate the structure and content of adolescent medicine and health training curricula for medical students, paediatricians, and other primary care physicians in the European region. A questionnaire survey was sent by e-mail to experts in the field from 36 European countries, addressing the content of adolescent health issues. Data was obtained from all 36 countries. At the undergraduate level, seven countries reported some mandatory stand-alone teaching (sessions dealing specifically with adolescents), while seven countries reported optional stand-alone teaching. In only 7 out of 36 countries were issues critical to adolescents covered as stand-alone sessions. At the postgraduate level, 15 countries delivered stand-alone mandatory training sessions to primary, secondary, or tertiary care paediatricians, covering most of the five critical areas listed in the questionnaire. In another 13 countries, such sessions were not mandatory and were inexistent in eight of them. The coverage among school physicians was similar but was much lower among general practitioners.Conclusion: Paediatric associations and academic institutions should advocate for a better coverage of adolescent health and medicine in the training curricula of health care providers. What is known: • In most European countries, adolescent medicine is still poorly represented as a discipline. • Experts have recently published recommendations regarding what form the structure and content of a training curriculum in this field should take. What is new: • This paper gives information on the extent and content of training in adolescent medicine and health as currently offered within under- and postgraduate European training curricula, in terms of stand-alone mandatory (versus optional) sessions. • In many European countries, both medical students and residents are poorly exposed to the basic knowledge and skills pertaining to adolescent health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Racial-ethnic minorities receive lower quality and intensity of health care compared with whites across a wide range of preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic services and disease entities. These disparities in health care contribute to continuing racial-ethnic disparities in the burden of illness and death. Several national medical organizations and the Institute of Medicine have issued position papers and recommendations for the elimination of health care disparities. However, physicians in practice are often at a loss for how to translate these principles and recommendations into specific interventions in their own clinical practices. This paper serves as a blueprint for translating principles for the elimination of racial-ethnic disparities in health care into specific actions that are relevant for individual clinical practices. We describe what is known about reducing racial-ethnic disparities in clinical practice and make recommendations for how clinician leaders can apply this evidence to transform their own practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objective of this paper was to describe primary care prescribers' perspectives on electronic prescribing drug alerts at the point of prescribing.Design: We used a mixed-method study which included clinician surveys (web-based and paper) and focus groups with prescribers and staff.Participants: Prescribers (n = 157) working in one of 64 practices using 1 of 6 e-prescribing technologies in 6 US states completed the quantitative survey and 276 prescribers and staff participated in focus groups.Measurements: The study measures self-reported frequency of overriding of drug alerts; open-ended responses to: "What do you think of the drug alerts your software generates for you?"Results: More than 40% of prescribers indicated they override drug-drug interactions most of the time or always (range by e-prescribing system, 25% to 50%). Participants indicated that the software and the interaction alerts were beneficial to patient safety and valued seeing drug-drug interactions for medications prescribed by others. However, they noted that alerts are too sensitive and often unnecessary. Participant suggestions included: (1) run drug alerts on an active medication list and (2) allow prescribers to set the threshold for severity of alerts.Conclusions: Primary care prescribers recognize the patient safety value of drug prescribing alerts embedded within electronic prescribing software. Improvements to increase specificity and reduce alert overload are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Overuse of antibiotics in the treatment of acute respiratory tract infection (ARI) contributes to the growing problem of antibiotic-resistant infections.Objective: To identify factors that influence community practitioners to prescribe antibiotics and examine how they differ from the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guideline for treatment of ARI.Design: Paper case vignette study using a fractional factorial design.Participants: One hundred one community practitioners and eight faculty members.Main Measurements: We asked community practitioners to estimate how likely they would be to prescribe antibiotics in each of 20 cases of ARI and then used multiple regression to infer the importance weights of each of nine clinical findings. We then compared practitioners' weights with those of a panel of eight faculty physicians who evaluated the cases following the CDC guidelines rather than their own judgments.Main Results: Practitioners prescribed antibiotics in 44.5% of cases, over twice the percentage treated by the panel using the CDC guidelines (20%). In deciding to prescribe antibiotic treatment, practitioners gave little or no weight to patient factors such as whether the patients wanted antibiotics. Although weighting patterns differed among practitioners, the majority (72%) gave the greatest weight to duration of illness. When illness duration was short, the rate of prescribing (20.1%) was the same as the rate of the faculty panel (20%).Conclusions: Based on hypothetical cases of ARI, community practitioners prescribed antibiotics at twice the rate of faculty following CDC practice guidelines. Practitioners were most strongly influenced by duration of illness. The effect of duration was strongest when accompanied by fever or productive cough, suggesting that these situations would be important areas for practitioner education and further clinical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]