Search

Background: Clinical guidelines for type 2 diabetes are a resource for providers to manage their patients and may help highlight specific areas in need of further education and training. We sought to determine how often guidelines are used and the relationship to physicians' diabetes-related knowledge and decision making. Methods: Existing users of electronic clinical support tools were invited to complete an online questionnaire. A knowledge score was calculated for five questions related to prevention of diabetes and treatment of its complications. We explored the association of clinical guideline use with diabetes-related knowledge and self-reported decision making using logistic regression models, adjusted for key covariates. Results: Of 383 physicians completing the questionnaire, 53% reported using diabetes guidelines routinely. Mean diabetes knowledge score for guideline users (GU) was significantly higher than non-guideline users (NGU) (3.37 ± 0.072 vs. 2.76 ± 0.084; p < 0.001). GU were significantly more likely to report a good understanding of type 2 diabetes medications (OR = 2.99, 95% CI 1.95-4.61; p < 0.001). GU were less likely to report their unfamiliarity with insulin as an important barrier to early insulin use (OR = 0.41, 0.21-0.80; p = 0.007) and with pharmacologic options as a barrier to prescribing intensive multifactorial interventions (OR = 0.32, 0.17-0.58; p < 0.001). Associations remained significant after adjusting for physician specialty, practice volume and frequency diagnosing or treating diabetes patients. Conclusions: Significant gaps exist in diabetes-related knowledge and decision making among practicing physicians, as highlighted by clinical guideline use. The development of educational and training strategies to address these needs may ultimately improve outcomes for patients with diabetes and should be investigated in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Residency work hour restrictions in 2003 changed medical student participation in overnight call.Purposes: The goal is to compare experiences, attitudes, and skills between medical students who did and did not participate in overnight call.Methods: Using a retrospective cohort design, all students at one medical school received a survey at the end of their 3rd-year internal medicine clerkship. Students at 3 clerkship sites were required to take overnight call, and students at 2 sites were not.Results: One hundred four of 167 (62%) students participated. Sixty-one of 104 (59%) took overnight call. Overnight call students reported improved team relationships and were able to evaluate more unstable “cross-cover” patients. Students who took overnight call were more likely to state it was worthwhile (58% vs. 34%;p= .034). Overnight call led to fatigue and the perception of interference with didactics.Conclusions: Overnight call within the internal medicine clerkship has positive and negative effects. With new residency work hour restrictions, schools may consider innovative ways to preserve the positive experiences while working to minimize fatigue and interference with learning. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: A specialties’ lifestyle is known to be important for specialty selection, but how medical students define this concept is unknown. Purpose: The aim of this article is to determine how 4th-year medical students perceive lifestyle of specialties. Methods: All 4th-year U.S. medical students graduating in 2009 with a military service obligation were invited to participate in an electronic survey. Responses to an open-ended question, “When someone says ‘That specialty has a good lifestyle,’ what does that mean to you?” were classified into themes by a consensus of the authors and then compared to the students’ selected specialty. Results: Response rate for the questionnaire was 46% (369 of 797). Four themes describing lifestyle emerged: “schedule control” (67% of students), “off time” (53%), “financial aspects” (48%), and “work life” (26%). Conclusions: Medical students’ definition of a “good lifestyle” includes four themes, which should be used in future research of the lifestyle factor of specialty selection. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]