RESEARCH ROUNDUP APRIL 2018

Research finds that older doctors have higher notification rates

You’re all aware of the findings of the Expert Advisory Group on Revalidation that reported on the risk of age (i.e. over 65 years) being a risk factor for notification?

Well here’s a paper that backs that up.

This paper examines whether ‘older doctors’ are at a higher risk of notification than those aged 36-60.

And the answer is: they are! 37% more! Mostly related to:

• Physical illness
• Cognitive decline
• Inadequate record keeping
• Unlawful use or supply of medications
• Inappropriate prescribing
• Disruptive behaviour
• Substandard treatment

Read it for yourself here:

http://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/vtXEzfAUUdXJbgz8jEK6/full

Last month you were promised coverage of any interesting papers on health professional education featured in MedEdPublish.

Here are 3 papers highly relevant to supervisors that just might float your boat! 

Feedback – different sources, different uses – support for the apprenticeship model?

This interesting paper examines feedback given to medical students by junior doctors and compares it with that given by consultants.

Unsurprisingly perhaps, that given by junior doctors was useful regarding assessments; that given by clinicians was more geared toward clinical practice.

Perhaps what this paper really represents is support for the apprenticeship model.

Make up your own mind! Read it here:

https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2018.0000081.1

“Recognition” (i.e. required training) for supervisors – the UK experience

So in our last Supervisor Survey, we asked you whether you thought there should be  a mandatory qualification for supervisors.

The result was an overwhelming no, but with a lot of caveats related to protected time, who pays, grandfathering, the value of experience and so on.

Some thought it was an inevitable expectation particularly as a younger generation wash through the system.

Some said they would walk away from training.

Turns out your UK counterparts have a similar reaction!

However it’s now a requirement over there!

Here’s a take-home message for policy makers though:

“For some it has made them decide whether they wish to continue in a named supervisory role, resulting in some clinicians having to take on the responsibility of supervising additional trainees. This appears to be a risk of the process” (p19).

With the tsunami of medical students yet to fully hit, it’s a message that needs to be heard in Canberra…

https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2018.0000073.1

Professionalism = courage, humility and mercy?

The literature and the sector have waxed and waned about professionalism since, well, time immemorial really.

Definitions are not necessarily easy to come by but everyone seems to recognize it, particularly the lack of it, when they see it.

At Michigan State University, they introduced a Virtuous Student Physician curriculum (great name!).

The attributes were:

• Competence
• Honesty
• Respect for others
• Compassion
• Professional responsibility
• Social responsibility.

So far so good!

However, students then began complaining that staff were not exhibiting these attributes themselves, thus promoting the oft-spoken of “hidden curriculum”!

In reviewing their program, what emerged was that these attributes were actually responsibilities and that possession of these attributes was a bare minimum.

Why “virtues”?

Because they are aspirational and often difficult to achieve. But the pursuit of excellence should drive us all toward them.

So they boiled it all down and percolated it all up and what emerged was the attributes listed above as a minimum, but in the pursuit of excellence, these were encompassed by the virtues of courage, humility and mercy.

A really interesting approach to a complex topic that is still befuddling a lot of medical schools and colleges.

Be courageous, humble and merciful when you read all about it here:

https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2018.0000074.1