Evaluating an inquiry-based learning program.

Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is a promising educational framework that is understudied in graduate medical education. To determine participant satisfaction and engagement with phases of an IBL postgraduate education program, a mixed-methods study collected data via survey statements and open-ended responses. The authors included participants attending an intensive care medicine (ICM) IBL program from May to November 2020. Quantitative outcomes included participants' satisfaction with the IBL format and impact of engagement with IBL on the learning experience. Qualitative outcomes explored determinants of engagement with IBL phases and the impact on the learning experience. Of 378 attendees, 167 submitted survey responses (44.2%). There was strong agreement relating to overall satisfaction (93.4%). Responses indicated engagement with "orientation" (94.6%), "conceptualization" (97.3%), "discussion" (91.1%), and "conclusion" (91.0%) but limited engagement with the "investigation" phase (48.1%). Greater engagement with IBL phases had positive impacts, with repeat attenders having clearer learning objectives (79.1% vs. 56.6%, P < 0.05) and enhanced learning through collaborative discussion (65.9% vs. 48.7%, P < 0.05). Qualitative analysis showed that ICM learners value active learning principles, clear objectives, and a safe environment to expand their "knowledge base." Sessions facilitated "clinically relevant learning," with application of theoretical knowledge. Learners transformed and "reframed their understanding," using the input of others' experiences. ICM learners were highly satisfied with the IBL format and reported valuable learning. Participants engaged strongly with all IBL phases except the investigation phase during the sessions. IBL facilitated learners' active construction of meaning, facilitating a constructivist approach to learning.NEW & NOTEWORTHY An inquiry-based learning (IBL) program was launched as part of a novel binational intensive care medicine education program. Postgraduate intensive care medicine practitioners participated in this education intervention, where facilitated group discussions explored core intensive care medicine concepts. Survey responses indicated overall satisfaction, engagement with the IBL format, and a constructivist approach to learning. This study provided new insights into the benefits and challenges of an IBL program in the context of practicing clinicians.

Simple prescribing errors and allergy documentation in medical hospital admissions in Australia and New Zealand.

This study aimed to quantify and compare the prevalence of simple prescribing errors made by clinicians in the first 24 hours of a general medical patient's hospital admission. Four public or private acute care hospitals across Australia and New Zealand each audited 200 patients' drug charts. Patient demographics, pharmacist review and pre-defined prescribing errors were recorded. At least one simple error was present on the medication charts of 672/715 patients, with a linear relationship between the number of medications prescribed and the number of errors (r = 0.571, p < 0.001). The four sites differed significantly in the prevalence of different types of simple prescribing errors. Pharmacists were more likely to review patients aged > or = 75 years (39.9% vs 26.0%; p < 0.001) and those with more than 10 drug prescriptions (39.4% vs 25.7%; p < 0.001). Patients reviewed by a pharmacist were less likely to have inadequate documentation of allergies (13.5% vs 29.4%, p < 0.001). Simple prescribing errors are common, although their nature differs from site to site. Clinical pharmacists target patients with the most complex health situations, and their involvement leads to improved documentation.

Preparing the future workforce for healthcare in Australia.

Medical education fails to prepare young doctors for the nature of the work they will encounter. Doctors face a rapidly changing medical landscape, which relies more and more upon interprofessional collaboration to optimise patient outcomes and upon non-clinical skills to provide care efficiently and cost effectively. The current response to change is a reactive and resource-intensive effort, where established doctors are directed towards new ways of working. A better response would be interprofessional clinical and non-clinical training, incorporating a philosophy and style that accommodate innovation, communication and change. This preparative training should be overseen by a single educational enterprise that links undergraduate and postgraduate instruction. Improved training might enable better design of the healthcare system from within.