ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: In 2016, The Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA) initiated the formation of a working group comprising medical microbiologists to establish guidelines to assist Australian laboratories to implement selective and cascade reporting of antimicrobials-the first guidelines of this type in the world. METHODS: A 2017 audit of antimicrobial reporting in Australian and New Zealand laboratories identified significant opportunities for improvement and standardization of selective reporting. RESULTS: The first draft of the RCPA Selective Reporting Guidelines was circulated to all RCPA Microbiology fellows for feedback in August 2018 and the first version was published in February 2019. Subsequently, version two of the guidelines has recently been published in Australia, and New Zealand adapted these guidelines for formulation of their own national guidelines to accommodate local needs. CONCLUSIONS: Here we describe the processes, acceptance and challenges associated with the establishment of these guidelines and measurement of their impact.
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents , Pathologists , Humans , Australia , Australasia , Laboratories , Anti-Infective Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Widespread, quality genomics education for health professionals is required to create a competent genomic workforce. A lack of standards for reporting genomics education and evaluation limits the evidence base for replication and comparison. We therefore undertook a consensus process to develop a recommended minimum set of information to support consistent reporting of design, development, delivery, and evaluation of genomics education interventions. METHODS: Draft standards were derived from literature (25 items from 21 publications). Thirty-six international experts were purposively recruited for three rounds of a modified Delphi process to reach consensus on relevance, clarity, comprehensiveness, utility, and design. RESULTS: The final standards include 18 items relating to development and delivery of genomics education interventions, 12 relating to evaluation, and 1 on stakeholder engagement. CONCLUSION: These Reporting Item Standards for Education and its Evaluation in Genomics (RISE2 Genomics) are intended to be widely applicable across settings and health professions. Their use by those involved in reporting genomics education interventions and evaluation, as well as adoption by journals and policy makers as the expected standard, will support greater transparency, consistency, and comprehensiveness of reporting. Consequently, the genomics education evidence base will be more robust, enabling high-quality education and evaluation across diverse settings.
Subject(s)
Genomics , Research Report , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans , Stakeholder ParticipationABSTRACT
Genomic medicine is being implemented on a global scale, requiring a genomic-competent health workforce. To inform education as part of implementation strategies to optimize adoption of genomics by non-genetics physicians, we investigated current practices, perceptions and preferences relating to genomic testing and education. Australian non-genetics physicians completed an online survey; we conducted univariate and multivariate analyses of determinants of confidence and engagement with genomic medicine. Confident or engaged respondents were more likely to be pediatricians, have completed continuing genomics education (CGE) and/or have genomics research experience. Confident or engaged respondents were also more likely to prefer to request genomic testing with support from genetics services than other models. Respondents who had completed CGE and were engaged reported higher confidence than those who were not engaged. We propose a progression of genomic competence aligned with service delivery models, where education is one enabler of mastery or independence to facilitate genomic tests (from referral to requesting with or without clinical genetics support). Workplace learning could provide additional impetus for adoption.
ABSTRACT
There is much talk of the crisis in medical workforce. This paper outlines the huge problem facing pathology services in Australia and the impact this will have on the delivery of health care services.