Conociendo a los tutores de Medicina Interna: nuevas necesidades para la formación / Getting to know internal medicine mentors: new training requirements

Introducción y objetivos: los tutores son los responsables de planificar el aprendizaje de los residentes. El objetivo de este trabajo es conocer la situación de los tutores de Medicina Interna en España y detectar áreas de mejora que puedan facilitar su trabajo. Material y métodos: encuestas online a tutores de Medicina Interna de mayo a julio de 2017 con análisis posterior de los datos. Resultados: respondieron 110 tutores, de 13 comunidades autónomas y hospitales de todos los niveles con docencia en Medicina Interna. Sesenta y tres fueron hombres (57,3%), la media de edad fue de 48 años y tenían una experiencia como tutores de 8,5 años. En el 88,2% de los casos se respeta la ratio de cinco residentes por tutor; un 46% piensa que debería disminuirse esta ratio para optimizar su labor. Un tercio había sido elegido por el responsable del servicio y el 30% nunca ha realizado cursos sobre formación. La entrevista tutor-residentes es utilizada por la mayoría de los tutores (96,4%) como herramienta de comunicación. En relación a las rotaciones, la cuarta parte no son planificadas por los tutores y, solo la mitad, contacta con los centros donde los residentes realizan las rotaciones externas. El 61% cree que no se realiza bien la evaluación de residentes, con muy escasa utilización de las nuevas herramientas de evaluación. Conclusiones: disminuir la ratio tutor/residente y la formación en técnicas de evaluación y desarrollo del aprendizaje podría mejorar la calidad de la tutorización

Introduction and objectives: mentors are responsible for planning the residents' learning. The aim of this study was to determine the situation of internal medicine mentors in Spain and detect areas of improvement that can facilitate their work. Material and methods: online surveys were sent to internal medicine mentors from May to July 2017, the results of which were subsequently analysed. Results: a total of 110 mentors from 13 autonomous communities and from hospitals of all levels with courses in internal medicine responded to the survey. Of these mentors, 63 were men (57.3%), and the mean age was 48 years. The mean experience as mentors was 8.5 years. Some 88.2% of the cases had a ratio of 5 residents to 1 mentor; 46% of the mentors believed this ratio should be decreased to optimize their work. A third of the mentors were chosen by the heads of the department, and 30% had not previously taken courses on training. The mentor-resident interview was used by most mentors (96.4%) as a communication tool. A quarter of the rotations were not planned by the mentors, and only half had contact with the centres where the residents performed the external rotations. Sixty-one percent of the mentors were of the opinion that resident assessments were not conducted properly, with very little use of the new assessment tools. Conclusions: reducing the mentor-resident ratio and adding training in assessment techniques and learning development could improve the quality of the mentoring

Getting to know internal medicine mentors: new training requirements. / Conociendo a los tutores de Medicina Interna: nuevas necesidades para la formación.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Mentors are responsible for planning the residents' learning. The aim of this study was to determine the situation of internal medicine mentors in Spain and detect areas of improvement that can facilitate their work. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Online surveys were sent to internal medicine mentors from May to July 2017, the results of which were subsequently analysed. RESULTS: A total of 110 mentors from 13 autonomous communities and from hospitals of all levels with courses in internal medicine responded to the survey. Of these mentors, 63 were men (57.3%), and the mean age was 48 years. The mean experience as mentors was 8.5 years. Some 88.2% of the cases had a ratio of 5 residents to 1 mentor; 46% of the mentors believed this ratio should be decreased to optimize their work. A third of the mentors were chosen by the heads of the department, and 30% had not previously taken courses on training. The mentor-resident interview was used by most mentors (96.4%) as a communication tool. A quarter of the rotations were not planned by the mentors, and only half had contact with the centres where the residents performed the external rotations. Sixty-one percent of the mentors were of the opinion that resident assessments were not conducted properly, with very little use of the new assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the mentor-resident ratio and adding training in assessment techniques and learning development could improve the quality of the mentoring.

A comparison of mental health hospital admissions in a cohort of heroin users prior to and after rapid opiate detoxification and oral naltrexone maintenance.

Mental health (MH) hospital admissions were investigated in a cohort (N=1184) of heroin dependent persons using linked health records. All MH in-patient admissions were extracted 36 months before to 36 months after commencing rapid opioid detoxification (ROD) and oral naltrexone. Results show that the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of drug-related and other MH admissions peaked in the 3 months immediately prior to treatment. All categories subsequently declined to baseline levels by 36 months following treatment. The authors conclude that treatment for heroin dependence reduces risk of MH admissions.