Experiences as a clinical teaching fellow: interviews with clinical teaching fellows in the West Midlands.

BACKGROUND: The majority of junior doctors in the UK do not proceed directly into specialty training after completing mandatory foundation training but instead take a year out of training. A common post undertaken during a year out of training is a clinical teaching fellow (CTF) role which is used to provide undergraduate medical student teaching. There is only a small amount of literature available regarding CTF posts, and very little of this explores experiences or reasons for taking up such as post. An understanding of the reasons why doctors are choosing to work as CTFs and what their experiences are in post will contribute to how the role is further developed and utilised within the NHS. This study aimed to explore the experiences of CTFs employed in the West Midlands at NHS hospital Trusts. METHODS: CTFs working in Trusts in the West Midlands region registered as students on the Education for Healthcare Professionals Post Graduate Certificate course at the University of Birmingham in August 2019 and 2020 who were enrolled in a longitudinal study were invited to take part in an individual interview asking about their experiences as CTFs. RESULTS: Nine CTFs participated in an interview. Five main themes were identified which related to their experiences in post and plans for future careers. Participants reported choosing to undertake a CTF role due to wanting a break from clinical work and having previously enjoyed delivering teaching. Positive experiences in post included lifestyle related benefits and self-development opportunities. Challenges identified with the role included the impact of COVID-19 and volume of students. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to use interview methodology to explore experiences of CTFs, and has provided a valuable insight into the experiences of those in post in the West Midlands region. Understanding why doctors chose this job and what their experiences are could help to further develop and refine the role. To guarantee demands for teaching staff are met those employing CTFs should be aware of reasons why doctors apply for the post and ensure the post remains a desirable option.

The Clinical Teaching Fellow role: exploring expectations and experiences.

BACKGROUND: Many UK junior doctors are now taking a year out of the traditional training pathway, usually before specialty training, and some choose to work as a clinical teaching fellow (CTF). CTFs primarily have responsibility for delivering hospital-based teaching to undergraduate medical students. Only a very small amount of literature is available regarding CTF posts, none of which has explored why doctors choose to undertake the role and their expectations of the job. This study aimed to explore the expectations and experiences of CTFs employed at NHS hospital Trusts in the West Midlands. METHODS: CTFs working in Trusts in the West Midlands region registered as students on the Education for Healthcare Professionals Post Graduate Certificate course at the University of Birmingham in August 2019 took part in a survey and a focus group. RESULTS: Twenty-eight CTFs participated in the survey and ten participated in the focus group. In the survey, participants reported choosing a CTF role due to an interest in teaching, wanting time out of training, and being unsure of which specialty to choose. Expectations for the year in post were directly related to reasons for choosing the role with participants expecting to develop teaching skills, and have a break from usual clinical work and rotations. The focus group identified five main themes relating to experiences starting their job, time pressures and challenges faced in post, how CTF jobs differed between Trusts, and future career plans. Broadly, participants reported enjoying their year in a post at a mid-year point but identified particular challenges such as difficulties in starting the role and facing time pressures in their day-to-day work. CONCLUSION: This study has provided a valuable insight into the CTF role and why doctors choose a CTF post and some of the challenges experienced, adding to the sparse amount of literature. Understanding post holders' experiences may contribute to optimisation of the role. Those employing CTFs should consider ensuring a formal handover process is in place between outgoing and incoming CTFs, having a lead person at their Trust responsible for evaluating changes suggested by CTFs, and the balance of contractual duties and personal development time.

Safety and efficacy of tuberculosis vaccine candidates in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of randomised controlled clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) remains a leading cause of death worldwide, with 98% of cases occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The only vaccine licenced for the prevention of TB has limited protection for adolescents, adults and vulnerable populations. A safe and effective vaccine for all populations at risk is imperative to achieve global elimination of TB. We aimed to systematically review the efficacy and safety of TB vaccine candidates in late-phase clinical trials conducted in LMICs. METHODS: Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov and Greylit.org were searched in June 2021 to identify phase 2 or later clinical randomised controlled trials that report the efficacy or safety (adverse events) of TB vaccine candidates with participants of any age living in an LMIC. TB vaccine candidates listed in the 2020 WHO Global TB Report were eligible for inclusion aside from BCG revaccination. Trials were excluded if all participants had active TB at baseline. Two reviewers independently assessed papers for eligibility, and for bias and quality using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and GRADE guidelines, respectively. We report efficacy rates and frequencies of adverse events from each included trial where available and qualitatively synthesise the findings. RESULTS: Thirteen papers representing eleven trials met our inclusion criteria. Seven vaccine candidates were reviewed across seven countries: M72/AS01, RUTI, VPM1002, H56:IC31, MTBVAC, DAR-901 and ID93 + GLA-SE. Two trials reported on efficacy: an efficacy rate of 54% (95% CI 11.5, 76.2) was reported for M72/AS01 in adults with latent TB and 3% (95% CI -13.9, 17.7) for DAR-901 in healthy adolescents. However, the latter trial was underpowered. All vaccine candidates had comparable occurrences of adverse events between treatment arms and demonstrated acceptable safety profiles; though, RUTI resulted in one serious complication in a person living with HIV. M72/AS01 was the only vaccine considered safe across a diverse group of people including people living with HIV or latent TB and healthy infants and adolescents. CONCLUSION: Further efficacy trials for M72/AS01 are warranted to include additional populations at risk where safety has been demonstrated. Further safety trials are needed for the remaining vaccine candidates to confirm safety in vulnerable populations.

The Clinical Teaching Fellow role: views of the Heads of Academy in the West Midlands.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly junior doctors are taking a year out of the traditional training pathway, and some opt to spend a year in a clinical teaching fellow (CTF) post. The CTF post mainly involves delivering hospital-based teaching to undergraduate medical students. In NHS hospital Trusts in the West Midlands, Heads of Academy (HoAs) have oversight of medical education at each Trust and therefore have responsibility for employing and directing the work of CTFs. Currently, only limited literature exists about the CTF role and exploring this from the point of view of different stakeholders in medical education is important in terms of contributing towards development of the role. This study aimed to explore the views of HoAs in the West Midlands region regarding CTFs employed at their Trusts. METHODS: All HoAs at the NHS Trust/teaching hospitals associated with the University of Birmingham were invited to take part in an in-depth interview about CTFs at their Trusts. Interviews were held via Zoom recorded using Zoom's recording functionality. Interview transcripts were then coded and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Seven out of 11 HoAs participated in an interview. Seven themes were identified: CTF duties/Job role, Relationship with students, Benefits of having CTFs, Challenges associated with CTFs, Popularity of the role, What Trust offers CTFs, and Future of the role. Primarily it was felt that having CTFs at their Trust was beneficial in terms of the amount of teaching they provide for medical students. The HoAs were keen to ensure the CTF posts were of maximum benefit to both the post holders and to the Trusts where they were based. The CTF role is one that they felt would continue and develop in the future. CONCLUSION: This study has provided the first insight into the CTF role from the point of view of senior doctors with responsibility for delivery of undergraduate medical education. The consistency and reliability of teaching provided by the CTFs was identified as a key benefit of the role. Future work exploring the role from the point of view of post holders themselves would be beneficial to contribute to development of the role.

New and emerging technologies for the diagnosis and monitoring of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A horizon scanning review.

There is a need for straightforward, novel diagnostic and monitoring technologies to enable the early diagnosis of COPD and its differentiation from other respiratory diseases, to establish the cause of acute exacerbations and to monitor disease progression. We sought to establish whether technologies already in development could potentially address these needs. A systematic horizon scanning review was undertaken to identify technologies in development from a wide range of commercial and non-commercial sources. Technologies were restricted to those likely to be available within 18 months, and then evaluated for degree of innovation, potential for impact, acceptability to users and likelihood of adoption by clinicians and patients with COPD. Eighty technologies were identified, of which 25 were considered particularly promising. Biomarker tests, particularly those using sputum or saliva samples and/or available at the point of care, were positively evaluated, with many offering novel approaches to early diagnosis and to determining the cause for acute exacerbations. Several wrist-worn devices and smartphone-based spirometers offering the facility for self-monitoring and early detection of exacerbations were also considered promising. The most promising identified technologies have the potential to improve COPD care and patient outcomes. Further research and evaluation activities should be focused on these technologies.

Innovation and the burden of disease: retrospective observational study of new and emerging health technologies reported by the EuroScan Network from 2000 to 2009.

OBJECTIVES: Medical innovation in developed countries has been linked to burden of disease, with more innovation in areas representing greater investment return. This study used horizon scanning or early awareness and alert activity as a novel measure of innovation to determine whether new and emerging health technologies reported by international horizon scanning agencies reflected diseases constituting the greatest burden. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of the 20 member agencies of EuroScan (the International Information Network on New and Emerging Health Technologies), representing 17 developed countries. Burden of disease was defined as disability-adjusted life-years, taken from the 2004 World Health Organization Global Burden of Disease estimates. This analysis focused on 102 specific diseases within 21 broader groups. Horizon scanning output was measured as the number of technologies reported by EuroScan member agencies between 2000 and 2009. RESULTS: At best there was a weak association between innovation and burden of disease. An apparent high-level association was dependent on just three high-prevalence disease groups: malignant neoplasms, neuropsychiatric conditions, and cardiovascular disease. Disaggregating broader groups into specific diseases further weakened the association. Innovation is disproportionately strong in cancer and nonischemic heart disease and disproportionately weak in mental health. CONCLUSIONS: Innovations reported by early awareness and alert systems do not always reflect conditions accounting for the highest morbidity and mortality. The results do not support previous reports of a positive relationship between burden of disease and innovation, but accord with evidence of notable discrepancies among key groups. Factors other than disease burden drive innovation.

Factors affecting consultant attitudes to undertaking undergraduate medical student teaching in the UK: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to explore consultant attitudes towards teaching undergraduate medical students in the UK. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODOLOGY: Standard systematic review methodology was followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE and OpenGrey were searched from inception to August 2019 to identify studies exploring senior doctors' attitudes towards teaching undergraduate medical students. Two reviewers independently carried out key methodological steps including study screening/selection, quality assessment and data extraction. A narrative synthesis was undertaken. RESULTS: Five studies were included in the review dating 2003-2015. Two studies used questionnaires, and three used focus groups/semistructured interviews. Key findings identified across all studies were consultants generally found teaching undergraduate medical students enjoyable, and consultants identified time constraints as a barrier to teaching. Other findings were consultants feeling there was a lack of recognition for time spent teaching, and a lack of training/guidance regarding teaching students. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review to explore senior hospital doctors' attitudes towards teaching undergraduate medical students. Despite these five studies spanning 12 years, the same attitudes and issues regarding teaching are identified by all, suggesting lack of time particularly is a persistent problem regarding consultant-based teaching. An anecdotal impression is that consultants are no longer as enthusiastic about teaching as they once were, but it is evident over the 12 years of these studies that enjoyment levels, and presumably enthusiasm, have not changed significantly.

Trends in the costs of drugs launched in the UK between 1981 and 2015: an analysis of the launch price of drugs in five disease areas.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the trend in the launch price of new drugs for five common health conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using data on new drugs launched in the UK between 1981 and 2015 for hypertension, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, schizophrenia and colorectal cancer. DATA AND SOURCES: All drugs marketed in the UK between 1981 and 2015 (inclusive), and licensed specifically for the treatment of one of the five chosen conditions were included in the study. Newly launched medicines and their launch prices were identified by hand-searching all editions of the British National Formulary in addition to searching the websites of relevant regulatory agencies (European Medicines Agency and Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency). The launch price in UK pounds for a 28-day supply of each medicine at a typical or usual maintenance dose was adjusted for the effects of general inflation using the gross domestic product deflator series. RESULTS: 104 drugs were included in our study with a mean inflation-adjusted 28-day launch price of £288 (SD £678). The launch price of new drugs varied significantly across the five conditions, with drugs for hypertension having the lowest mean price (£27) and drugs for colorectal cancer having the highest mean price (£1590) (p<0.001). There were large increases in launch prices across the study period, but the magnitude and pattern was markedly different between therapeutic areas. Biological drugs represented 13.5% of all included drugs and had a significantly higher launch price than non- biological drugs (£1233 vs £141, p<0.001). 22.1% of included drugs were first-of-kind and had a significantly higher launch price than follow-on drugs (£768 vs £151) (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Drugs prices continue to increase across different therapeutic areas. This has some association with novelty, but, it is not clear if this increase in price is associated with medical benefits.

Trends in clinical development timeframes for antiviral drugs launched in the UK, 1981-2014: a retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: Recent decades have witnessed the development of highly innovative new antiviral drug therapies. However, there are concerns that rising costs and lengthening development times could have implications for future patient access to innovative new drugs. We sought to establish whether the time taken for the clinical development of new antiviral drugs launched in the UK had increased since the 1980s. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective observational study of all new antiviral drugs licensed for use in the UK. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Duration of clinical development (from initiation of studies in humans to receipt of Marketing Authorisation), subdivided into clinical trial and regulatory approval periods by the date of Marketing Authorisation Application. RESULTS: 48 new antiviral drugs were licensed for use in the UK between 1981 and 2014 (inclusive), over half (54%) initially for HIV infection. The overall mean duration of clinical development was 77.2 months, of which 64.6 months was spent in clinical trials before regulatory submission. The total time in clinical development increased from 41.7 months for drugs licensed 1981-1992 to 91.7 months for drugs licensed 2004-2014. This increase was accounted for by an increase in the clinical trials period and not the regulatory approval period, for which there was no observable trend. Drugs initially licensed to treat hepatitis C had a longer duration of clinical development than those indicated for other viral infections. However, the, initially shorter clinical development durations of drugs indicated for HIV infection increased more rapidly across the study period than those indicated for other viral infections. CONCLUSIONS: The time spent by antiviral drugs in clinical development has increased markedly in recent decades despite many initiatives to speed access to innovative new drugs. However, this represents only one part of the translational research pathway, and a complete picture of development timeframes is lacking.

How innovative are new drugs launched in the UK? A retrospective study of new drugs listed in the British National Formulary (BNF) 2001-2012.

OBJECTIVES: Innovative new drugs offer potential benefits to patients, healthcare systems, governments and the pharmaceutical industry. Recent data suggest annual numbers of new drugs launched in the UK have increased in recent years, and we sought to understand whether this represents increasing numbers of highly innovative drugs being made available or the introduction of increasing numbers of drugs with limited additional therapeutic value. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective observational study of new drug entries in the British National Formulary (BNF). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of new drugs launched in the UK each year (based on first appearance in the BNF) from 2001 to 2012, including new chemical entities and new biological drugs, categorised by degree of innovativeness according to published criteria that incorporate both clinical usefulness and the nature of the innovation. RESULTS: Highly innovative, moderately innovative and slightly innovative drugs made up 26%, 18% and 56% of all newly launched drugs, respectively, for the study period (n=290). There was an upward trend in annual numbers of slightly innovative drugs from 2004 onwards (R(2)=0.44), which aligned closely with the recovery in total numbers of new drugs launched each year since that time. There were no discernible time trends in the highly or moderately innovative categories. New drugs for malignancy and skin disease were most likely to be characterised as highly innovative (44% and 57%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Highly innovative new drugs comprise only around a quarter of all new drug launches in the UK. In contrast, drugs categorised as only slightly innovative comprised well over half of all new drugs and annual numbers in this category are increasing. Current policy initiatives that seek to increase the supply of innovative new drugs have long-lead times to impact, and will need careful assessment to ensure they deliver their aims without unintended consequences.

Decline in new drug launches: myth or reality? Retrospective observational study using 30 years of data from the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To describe trends in new drugs launched in the UK from 1982 to 2011 and test the hypothesis that the rate of new drug introductions has declined over the study period. There is wide concern that pharmaceutical innovation is declining. Reported trends suggest that fewer new drugs have been launched over recent decades, despite increasing investment into research and development. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING AND DATA SOURCE: Database of new preparations added annually to the British National Formulary (BNF). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of new drugs entered each year, including new chemical entities(NCEs) and new biological drugs, based on first appearance in the BNF. RESULTS: There was no significant linear trend in the number of new drugs introduced into the UK from 1982 to 2011. Following a dip in the mid-1980s (11-12 NCEs/new biologics introduced annually from 1985 to 1987), there was a variable increase in the numbers of new drugs introduced annually to a peak of 34 in 1997. This peak was followed by a decline to approximately 20 new drugs/year between 2003 and 2006, and another peak in 2010. Extending the timeline further back with existing published data shows an overall slight increase in new drug introductions of 0.16/year over the entire 1971 to 2011 period. CONCLUSIONS: The purported 'innovation dip' is an artefact of the time periods previously studied. Reports of declining innovation need to be considered in the context of their timescale and perspective.

Emerging point of care tests for influenza: innovation or status quo.

BACKGROUND: Point of care tests (POCTs) for influenza potentially offer earlier diagnosis, enabling specific treatment, infection control measures and greater patient convenience and satisfaction. Current POCTs have limited sensitivity, some cannot distinguish influenza types, none differentiate subtypes and are relatively expensive. AIMS: To identify and characterise influenza POCTs expected to be available for clinical use in the U.K. by mid-2013, highlighting those with potential benefits over existing tests. METHODS: Potential developers of influenza POCTs were identified through known manufacturers' websites, Medical Technology trade associations, the EuroScan International Network, an expert advisory group and by searching relevant online sources. Identified companies were asked to provide standard information on relevant technologies. RESULTS: Fifty-six companies were identified, and 29 (52%) responded, identifying 57 potentially relevant technologies. Of these, 40 (70%) were already available or had undetermined status and 5 (9%) were excluded as time to results took over 60 minutes. Of the remaining 12 emerging POCTs, 10 (83%) reportedly enabled differentiation of influenza types and eight differentiation of A subtypes. Nasopharyngeal swabs were the most commonly acceptable sample type; the sample volume ranging from 80 µl to 1.4 ml. DISCUSSION: Most identified emerging influenza POCTs offered differentiation of influenza type and subtype. Tests claiming this capability include several incorporating reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays; though, these also had the longest time to result. However, whilst some identified POCTs exhibit high sensitivity and specificity, most lack published clinical data for assessment, and the overall costs of these technologies remains largely unknown.