Search

Background: Investigating beliefs about medicines has been of interest over the past years, with studies aiming to better understand theoretical reasons behind development of such beliefs. Objective: This study aimed to produce a culturally and contextually appropriate version of the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ) in the Maltese language and to assess its psychometric properties. Methods: Medication beliefs were evaluated using the BMQ which is divided into two sections: BMQ-General (sub-scales: Overuse and Harm, 4 items per sub-scale) and BMQ-Specific (sub-scales: Necessity and Concerns, 5 items per sub-scale). Following translation/back translation, the Maltese version of the BMQ was applied to patients having asthma, diabetes, cardiovascular disease or depression who attended out-patients’ clinics at the main state general hospital in Malta between June and September 2013. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, alpha, was used to determine internal consistency of the BMQ and Principal Component Analysis using Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalisation was carried out to analyse component loading of the items on the respective sub-scales. Results: The Maltese version of the BMQ showed acceptable internal consistency for the harm scale (alpha=0.56), the necessity scale (alpha=0.73) and the concerns scale (alpha=0.66), however the overuse scale gave poor internal consistency (alpha=0.48) due to the item on natural remedies which posed some difficulty in the Maltese sample. The final solution for Principal Component Analysis yielded a four-factor structure representing the 4 sub-scales of the BMQ, with results being comparable to previous studies out in different languages. Conclusion: The Maltese version of the BMQ was found to have acceptable psychometric properties for the beliefs about medicines in the Maltese population.

Twin pregnancies are commonly assessed using singleton growth and birth weight reference charts. This practice has led to a significant number of twins labelled as small for gestational age (SGA), causing unnecessary interventions and increased risk of iatrogenic preterm birth. However, the use of twin-specific charts remains controversial. This study aims to assess whether twin-specific estimated fetal weight (EFW) and birth weight (BW) charts are more predictive of adverse outcomes compared to singleton charts. Centiles of EFW and BW were calculated using previously published singleton and twin charts. Categorical data were compared using Chi-square or McNemar tests. The study included 1740 twin pregnancies, with the following perinatal adverse outcomes recorded: perinatal death, preterm birth <34 weeks, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and admissions to the neonatal unit (NNU). Twin-specific charts identified prenatally and postnatally a smaller proportion of infants as SGA compared to singleton charts. However, twin charts showed a higher percentage of adverse neonatal outcomes in SGA infants than singleton charts. For example, perinatal death (SGA 7.2% vs. appropriate for gestational age (AGA) 2%, p < 0.0001), preterm birth <34 weeks (SGA 42.1% vs. AGA 16.4%, p < 0.0001), HDP (SGA 21.2% vs. AGA 13.5%, p = 0.015) and NNU admissions (SGA 69% vs. AGA 24%, p < 0.0001), when compared to singleton charts (perinatal death: SGA 2% vs. AGA 1%, p = 0.029), preterm birth <34 weeks: (SGA 20.6% vs. AGA 17.4%, p = 0.020), NNU admission: (SGA 34.5% vs. AGA 23.9%, p < 0.000). There was no significant association between HDP and SGA using the singleton charts ( p = 0.696). In SGA infants, according to the twin charts, the incidence of abnormal umbilical artery Doppler was significantly more common than in SGA using the singleton chart (27.0% vs. 8.1%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, singleton charts misclassify a large number of twins as at risk of fetal growth restriction. The evidence suggests that the following twin-specific charts could reduce unnecessary medical interventions prenatally and postnatally.

Objectives: To develop a paediatric radiology themed escape room session for undergraduate education and secondly, to determine participant satisfaction and improvement in knowledge., Methods: A paediatric radiology escape room with accompanying tutorial was developed around key learning objectives set within the RCR and ESR undergraduate curriculum. Students were recruited from two different universities and undertook the escape room themed teaching. An 8-question single best answer (SBA) test was completed before, immediately after and at 2 weeks post-teaching to determine participant improvement and retention of knowledge. The general feedback was also collected., Results: The escape room sessions were held three times, for 19 students (6-7 students per session). All groups completed the escape room in ≤ 20 min. Students enjoyed the experience, assigning an average satisfaction score of 9.4/10 (range 7-10). The majority (17/19, 89.5%) preferred this method of teaching to a lecture-based tutorial alone, although all said they found the tutorial component useful. For the SBA test, there was an average increase in 3.6 marks (range 1-6 marks) per participant between before and after the escape room. This improved knowledge was mostly sustained after 2 weeks, with an average increase of 3.4 marks difference (range 1 to 6) per participant compared to before the teaching., Conclusions: A paediatric radiology themed escape room is a feasible teaching method, enjoyed by participants and associated with an increase in radiological knowledge. Further work with larger sample size and direct comparison with other traditional teaching methods is required.

A shortage of clinical education placements for allied health students internationally has led to the need to explore innovative models of clinical education. The collaborative model where one clinical educator supervises two or more students completing a clinical placement concurrently is one model enabling expansion of student placements. The aims of this review were to investigate advantages and disadvantages of the collaborative model and to explore its implementation across allied health. A systematic search of the literature was conducted using three electronic databases (CINAHL, Medline, and Embase). Two independent reviewers evaluated studies for methodological quality. Seventeen studies met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Advantages and disadvantages identified were consistent across disciplines. A key advantage of the model was the opportunity afforded for peer learning, whilst a frequently reported disadvantage was reduced time for individual supervision of students. The methodological quality of many included studies was poor, impacting on interpretation of the evidence base. Insufficient data were provided on how the model was implemented across studies. There is a need for high quality research to guide implementation of this model across a wider range of allied health disciplines and to determine educational outcomes using reliable and validated measures.