A study of Foundation Year doctors’ prescribing in patients with kidney disease at a UK renal unit: a comparison with other prescribers regarding the frequency and type of errors

Using a self-regulated learning-enhanced video feedback educational intervention to improve junior doctor prescribing

Introduction: Medical school graduates in the UK consistently report feeling underprepared for the task of prescribing when embarking on practice. The effective application of self-regulated learning (SRL) approaches and feedback on complex tasks are associated with improved outcomes in practice-based clinical skills.Aims: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of an educational intervention using SRL-enhanced video feedback for improving the prescribing competency of junior doctors.Methods: A prospective cohort study was designed to compare intervention and control cohorts of junior doctors undertaking simulated clinical encounters at the beginning and end of their 4-month rotation through renal medicine.Results: The improvement in prescribing competency for the intervention cohort was significant (p < 0.001) with large effect size (d = 1.42). Self-efficacy improved in both cohorts with large (control cohort p = 0.026, r= 0.64) and medium (intervention cohort p = 0.083, d = 0.55) effect sizes. Goal setting and self-monitoring skills improved in the intervention cohort only with medium effect size (p = 0.096, d = 0.53).Conclusions: SRL-enhanced video feedback is effective for improving prescribing competency and developing SRL processes such as goal setting and self-monitoring skills in simulated clinical encounters. Further research is required to evaluate transferability to other clinical sub-speciality contexts and investigate the effectiveness of the intervention for improving prescribing in non-simulated settings.

Improving junior doctor medicine prescribing and patient safety: An intervention using personalised, structured, video-enhanced feedback and deliberate practice

AIMS

This research investigated the effectiveness of an intervention for improving the prescribing and patient safety behaviour among Foundation Year doctors. The intervention consisted of simulated clinical encounters with subsequent personalised, structured, video-enhanced feedback and deliberate practice, undertaken at the start of four-month sub-specialty rotations.

METHODS

Three prospective, non-randomised control intervention studies were conducted, within two secondary care NHS Trusts in England. The primary outcome measure, error rate per prescriber, was calculated using daily prescribing data. Prescribers were grouped to enable a comparison between experimental and control conditions using regression analysis. A break-even analysis evaluated cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in error rates of novice prescribers who received the intervention when compared with those of experienced prescribers. Novice prescribers not participating in the intervention had significantly higher error rates (P = .026, 95% confidence interval [CI] Wald 0.093 to 1.436; P = .026, 95% CI 0.031 to 0.397) and patients seen by them experienced significantly higher prescribing error rates (P = .007, 95% CI 0.025 to 0.157). Conversely, patients seen by the novice prescribers who received the intervention experienced a significantly lower rate of significant errors compared to patients seen by the experienced prescribers (P = .04, 95% CI -0.068 to -0.001). The break-even analysis demonstrates cost-effectiveness for the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Simulated clinical encounters using personalised, structured, video-enhanced feedback and deliberate practice improves the prescribing and patient safety behaviour of Foundation Year doctors. The intervention is cost-effective with potential to reduce avoidable harm.

Interventions to improve antimicrobial prescribing of doctors in training (IMPACT): a realist review

Background

Interventions to improve the antimicrobial prescribing practices of doctors have been implemented widely to curtail the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance, but have been met with varying levels of success.

Objectives

This study aimed to generate an in-depth understanding of how antimicrobial prescribing interventions ‘work’ (or do not work) for doctors in training by taking into account the wider context in which prescribing decisions are enacted.

Design

The review followed a realist approach to evidence synthesis, which uses an interpretive, theory-driven analysis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods data from relevant studies.

Setting

Primary and secondary care.

Participants

Not applicable.

Interventions

Studies related to antimicrobial prescribing for doctors in training.

Main outcome measures

Not applicable.

Data sources

EMBASE (via Ovid), MEDLINE (via Ovid), MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), Web of Science core collection limited to Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Science (CPCI-S) (via Thomson Reuters), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database (all via The Cochrane Library), Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA) (via ProQuest), Google Scholar (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) and expert recommendations.

Review methods

Clearly bounded searches of electronic databases were supplemented by citation tracking and grey literature. Following quality standards for realist reviews, the retrieved articles were systematically screened and iteratively analysed to develop theoretically driven explanations. A programme theory was produced with input from a stakeholder group consisting of practitioners and patient representatives.

Results

A total of 131 articles were included. The overarching programme theory developed from the analysis of these articles explains how and why doctors in training decide to passively comply with or actively follow (1) seniors’ prescribing habits, (2) the way seniors take into account prescribing aids and seek the views of other health professionals and (3) the way seniors negotiate patient expectations. The programme theory also explains what drives willingness or reluctance to ask questions about antimicrobial prescribing or to challenge the decisions made by seniors. The review outlines how these outcomes result from complex inter-relationships between the contexts of practice doctors in training are embedded in (hierarchical relationships, powerful prescribing norms, unclear roles and responsibilities, implicit expectations about knowledge levels and application in practice) and the mechanisms triggered in these contexts (fear of criticism and individual responsibility, reputation management, position in the clinical team and appearing competent). Drawing on these findings, we set out explicit recommendations for optimal tailoring, design and implementation of antimicrobial prescribing interventions targeted at doctors in training.

Limitations

Most articles included in the review discussed hospital-based, rather than primary, care. In cases when few data were available to fully capture all the nuances between context, mechanisms and outcomes, we have been explicit about the strength of our arguments.

Conclusions

This review contributes to our understanding of how antimicrobial prescribing interventions for doctors in training can be better embedded in the hierarchical and interprofessional dynamics of different health-care settings.

Future work

More work is required to understand how interprofessional support for doctors in training can contribute to appropriate prescribing in the context of hierarchical dynamics.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015017802.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Social and professional influences on antimicrobial prescribing for doctors-in-training: a realist review

Background

Antimicrobial resistance has led to widespread implementation of interventions for appropriate prescribing. However, such interventions are often adopted without an adequate understanding of the challenges facing doctors-in-training as key prescribers.

Methods

The review followed a realist, theory-driven approach to synthesizing qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods literature. Consistent with realist review quality standards, articles retrieved from electronic databases were systematically screened and analysed to elicit explanations of antimicrobial prescribing behaviours. These explanations were consolidated into a programme theory drawing on social science and learning theory, and shaped though input from patients and practitioners.

Results

By synthesizing data from 131 articles, the review highlights the complex social and professional dynamics underlying antimicrobial prescribing decisions of doctors-in-training. The analysis shows how doctors-in-training often operate within challenging contexts (hierarchical relationships, powerful prescribing norms, unclear roles and responsibilities, implicit expectations about knowledge levels, uncertainty about application of knowledge in practice) where they prioritize particular responses (fear of criticism and individual responsibility, managing one's reputation and position in the team, appearing competent). These complex dynamics explain how and why doctors-in-training decide to: (i) follow senior clinicians' prescribing habits; (ii) take (or not) into account prescribing aids, advice from other health professionals or patient expectations; and (iii) ask questions or challenge decisions. This increased understanding allows for targeted tailoring, design and implementation of antimicrobial prescribing interventions.

Conclusions

This review contributes to a better understanding of how antimicrobial prescribing interventions for doctors-in-training can be embedded more successfully in the hierarchical and inter-professional dynamics of different healthcare settings.