Objective structured clinical examination to teach competency in planetary health care and management - a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Health professionals are increasingly called upon and willing to engage in planetary health care and management. However, so far, this topic is rarely covered in medical curricula. As the need for professional communication is particularly high in this subject area, this study aimed to evaluate whether the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) could be used as an accompanying teaching tool. METHODS: During the winter semester 2022/2023, 20 third- and fifth-year medical students voluntarily participated in a self-directed online course, three workshops, and a formal eight-station OSCE on planetary health care and management. Each examinee was also charged alternatingly as a shadower with the role of providing feedback. Experienced examiners rated students' performance using a scoring system supported by tablet computers. Examiners and shadowers provided timely feedback on candidates` performance in the OSCE. Immediately after the OSCE, students were asked about their experience using a nine-point Likert-scale survey and a videotaped group interview. Quantitative analysis included the presentation of the proportional distribution of student responses to the survey and of box plots showing percentages of maximum scores for the OSCE performance. The student group interview was analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: Depending on the sub-theme, 60% -100% of students rated the subject of planetary health as likely to be useful in their professional lives. Similar proportions (57%-100%) were in favour of integrating planetary health into required courses. Students perceived learning success from OSCE experience and feedback as higher compared to that from online courses and workshops. Even shadowers learned from observation and feedback discussions. Examiners assessed students' OSCE performance at a median of 80% (interquartile range: 83%-77%) of the maximum score. CONCLUSIONS: OSCE can be used as an accompanying teaching tool for advanced students on the topic of planetary health care and management. It supports learning outcomes, particularly in terms of communication skills to sensitise and empower dialogue partners, and to initiate adaptation steps at the level of individual patients and local communities.

What motivates GPs to train medical students in their own practice? A questionnaire survey on the motivation of medical practices to train students as an approach to acquire training practices.

Background: With the new licensing regulations for doctors coming into force, medical faculties are faced with the task of recruiting and qualifying more GP colleagues to train students in their practices. Objective: The aim of the study was to determine the motivation of GPs to train students in their own medical practices. Method: A cross-sectional survey of Thuringian GPs was conducted from April to May 2020. 21 items on motivation, incentives and barriers were recorded and examined using univariate and multivariate analyses. Results: The response rate was 35.8% (538/1,513). The GPs surveyed considered themselves motivated to train students in their medical practices. The motives can be described as predominantly intrinsic: the mutual exchange of knowledge, desire to share knowledge and to promote future doctors. Incentives included the opportunity to keep up to date with the latest knowledge, further training and contacts with colleagues. Barriers to teaching in the own medical practice were concerns about not being able to treat the same number of patients, a possible disruption of practice operations and lack of space. An analysis of the subgroups of GPs who were not yet teaching physicians indicated similar motives and barriers regarding training students in their practices, with a slightly lower overall motivation. Conclusion: The results describe the facets of the motivation of Thuringian GPs to train students and can be helpful for the expansion of a sustainable network of training GP practices. It is essential to address motives, to counter difficulties with individual solutions and to create targeted incentives.

Outpatient teaching in specialist practices - a qualitative study with doctors about attitudes, influencing factors and specialist features.

Aim: The aim is to record existing attitudes, influencing factors and specialised requirements with regard to the training of medical students in specialist outpatient care with doctors working in outpatient care. Method: Between September 2020 and May 2021, individual interviews with 15 specialists employed in outpatient care were held as part of this qualitative study. The recorded interviews were evaluated structurally in accordance with the Kuchartz method. Results: Enhanced outpatient training for medical students in specialist teaching practices was considered as important by all participants. Among other things, motivational factors were pleasure in teaching, a feeling of duty, the desire to pass something on, the need to convey one's own ideas and to generate future talent for the field. A lack of time, greater organisational effort and legal concerns were stated as hurdles. Reducing organisational effort for teaching practices, appreciation of their teaching activity and financial considerations were in particular given as significant incentives for participating. The attitude of participants towards financial remuneration was heterogeneous. Different specialist features and requirements for student training were mapped out. Conclusion: This study provides, for the first time, findings about teaching in specialist outpatient establishments. They point to a great degree of willingness of specialist doctors to undertake teaching and provide starting points for creating concepts about producing teaching practices in specialist fields. Further quantitative investigation is required to substantiate the findings before us.

[The general practitioner perspective of a multimodal intervention for the adequate use of antibiotics in urinary tract infection - a qualitative interview study]. / Hausärztliche Perspektiven auf eine multimodale Intervention zum adäquaten Einsatz von Antibiotika beim Harnwegsinfekt ­ eine qualitative Interviewstudie.

INTRODUCTION: Contrary to current guideline recommendations, second-line antibiotics are still frequently used in the ambulatory treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTI), which are associated with a high risk of antibiotic resistance development. The REDARES project (REDuction of Antibiotic RESistance in uncomplicated urinary tract infections by treatment according to national guidelines in ambulatory care), funded by the Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, G-BA)/Innovation Fund is developing a multimodal intervention for primary care physicians to support them in a guideline-based approach. The intervention consists of the following components: (1) provision of local resistance data of pathogens of uncomplicated UTI (Robert Koch Institute), (2) concise guideline content on the therapy of uncomplicated UTI for patients (paper and online), and (3) prescription feedback on practice level and benchmarking among the study participants (anonymized). In a participatory approach and as part of the process evaluation, representatives of the intended target group were interviewed in advance about the acceptance and feasibility of the intervention. METHODS: Using guided individual interviews, Thuringian GPs were interviewed before the start of the intervention phase. Following a description of the study concept and the planned components of the intervention, the interviewees were asked about their assessment regarding acceptance and feasibility. The individual interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and qualitatively analyzed according to Mayring. RESULTS: A total of ten interviews with an average duration of 29minutes were conducted and evaluated. 40 per cent of the interviewed GPs were female and, on average, 45 years old. The interviewees described the uncomplicated UTI as an easily manageable condition. The practical nature of the research question was described as a reason to potentially participate in the intervention phase; lack of time or human resources were cited as potential barriers. Regarding the intervention elements, the provision of local resistance data of UTI pathogens was considered beneficial to their own work. The extraction of their own antibiotic prescription data from the practice software was basically assessed as feasible. The interviewees differed in their assessment of whether they would take account of the feedback on their prescribing behavior in their daily work. DISCUSSION: The interviews generated a detailed picture of the different diagnostic and therapeutic pathways used by respondents for uncomplicated UTI. Overall, they predominantly regarded both the study concept and the intervention components as feasible. Although the study population is small and not representative, some of the results seem to be transferable to other regions in Germany. CONCLUSION: A research question relating to their daily routine can increase participation of primary care physicians in (intervention) studies. Starting the process evaluation before the intervention seems to be reasonable since the results will be integrated into the design of the intervention. The method of data extraction from practice software by practice teams seems to be promising.

Evaluation of a multimodal intervention to promote rational antibiotic use in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Increasing antimicrobial resistance is a serious societal challenge affecting outpatient, inpatient and veterinary care. The German One-Health project, RAI (Rational use of Antibiotics via Information and Communication) addresses all three sectors. In the outpatient sector, General Practitioners (GPs) are the main prescribers of antibiotics and were therefore, targeted for this study. A multimodal intervention focusing on Acute Respiratory Tract infections (ARI) was designed and implemented. The aim of this study was to evaluate acceptance, rating and the self-reported impact of the intervention among GPs. METHODS: The intervention offered six tools: a GP training on rational antibiotic use, an app for self-monitoring, a leaflet and a set of posters (both for use as information materials in waiting rooms) and both digital and printed information prescriptions (material for 'prescribing' information instead of an antibiotic to the patient). The tools could be used according to individual preferences. The intervention was conducted between August 2016 and July 2017. Following the intervention, a three pages anonymous questionnaire was sent to all 271 participants. Items covered socio-demographic and professional background, use and judgement of the intervention tools (6 point Likert scale), impact of the intervention tools (4 point Likert scale). RESULTS: The response rate was 39% (n = 107). On average, respondents used 3.1 of the six available tools, with printed information prescriptions used most frequently (79%). Digital information prescriptions were used more frequently by men than by women (OR 2.8; 95% CI 1.16-7.24; p = 0.02). Eighty-seven percent of respondents stated that information prescriptions supported doctor-patient communication. In a comparison of the overall impression of the different intervention tools the GP training on rational antibiotic use was rated best (1.67 on a 6 point scale with 1 = highest, 6 = lowest) and most often noted as having had a "strong" or "very strong" impact on personal antibiotic prescribing behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The multimodal intervention addressing education and communication was well accepted among GPs and could help in fostering rational use of antibiotics in primary care.

Antibiotic prescribing behavior among general practitioners - a questionnaire-based study in Germany.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates the barriers and facilitators of the use of antibiotics in acute respiratory tract infections by general practitioners (GPs) in Germany. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team designed and pre-tested a written questionnaire addressing the topics awareness of antimicrobial resistance (7 items), use of antibiotics (9 items), guidelines/sources of information (9 items) and sociodemographic factors (7 items), using a five-point-Likert-scale ("never" to "very often"). The questionnaire was mailed by postally to 987 GPs with registered practices in eastern Germany in May 2015. RESULTS: 34% (340/987) of the GPs responded to this survey. Most of the participants assumed a multifactorial origin for the rise of multidrug resistant organisms. In addition, 70.2% (239/340) believed that their own prescribing behavior influenced the drug-resistance situation in their area. GPs with longer work experience (> 25 years) assumed less individual influence on drug resistance than their colleagues with less than 7 years experience as practicing physicians (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.32, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.17-0.62; P < 0.001). 99.1% (337/340) of participants were familiar with the "delayed prescription" strategy to reduce antibiotic prescriptions. However, only 29.4% (74/340) answered that they apply it "often" or "very often". GPs working in rural areas were less likely than those working in urban areas to apply delayed prescription. CONCLUSION: The knowledge on factors causing antimicrobial resistance in bacteria is good among GPs in eastern Germany. However measures to improve rational prescription are not widely implemented yet. Further efforts have to be made in order to improve rational prescription of antibiotic among GPs. Nevertheless, there is a strong awareness of antimicrobial resistance among the participating GPs.

Perceptions and attitudes regarding antibiotic resistance in Germany: a cross-sectoral survey amongst physicians, veterinarians, farmers and the general public.

Background: Drivers of antibiotic (AB) resistance (ABR) include outpatient treatment, hospital care and animal husbandry. During the first phase of the One Health project RAI (Responsible Antibiotic Use via Information and Communication) surveys were conducted in these sectors. Objectives: To compare perceptions and attitudes towards ABR among general practitioners (GPs), hospital physicians, veterinarians, pig farmers and the general public. Methods: Cross-sectional questions on AB use and ABR were integrated in group-specific surveys of GPs, hospital physicians, veterinarians, pig farmers and the German general population. Results: A total of 1789 participants (340 GPs, 170 hospital physicians, 215 pig farmers, 60 veterinarians and 1004 members of the public) responded. Each group tended to identify drivers of ABR as being from outside its own area of activity. Guidelines were shown to be an important information source for AB therapy for all prescriber groups, but the frequency of routine use differed (39% of GPs, 65% of hospital physicians and 53% of veterinarians). Regarding further information sources, hospital physicians preferred smartphone apps and e-learning, GPs preferred non-sponsored training and veterinarians preferred multidisciplinary networks and e-learning. Farmers were predominantly satisfied with existing solutions. Farmers had three times better basic knowledge of ABR and knew twice as many people with MDR organism problems than the general public. They also received information on ABR more often from their veterinarians than patients did from their doctors. Conclusions: This study reveals considerable differences in perceptions and attitudes to ABR among the groups investigated. The results can help to tailor future interventions. Furthermore, they promote mutual understanding and thus support the One Health approach.

Selection of pfmdr1 and pfcrt alleles in amodiaquine treatment failure in north-western Burkina Faso.

In 111 children under five years of age and with uncomplicated malaria in Nouna, north-western Burkina Faso, amodiaquine treatment failed in 75% (after PCR-based exclusion of new infections, 32%). In these, we assessed the role of Plasmodium falciparum pfmdr1 and pfcrt polymorphisms in amodiaquine resistance. Except for pfmdr1 1246Y (prevalence, 5%), no P. falciparum allele predicted treatment outcome. Pfcrt 76T as well as pfmdr1 86Y, 86Y-184F-1246D, and 86Y-184Y-1246Y were positively selected in treatment failures, and pfmdr1 86N-184F-1246D negatively. The weak association of pfmdr1/pfcrt alleles with amodiaquine treatment outcome suggests further factors to be involved in the unsatisfactory low efficacy of the drug and limits the usefulness of these markers in this area.