Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A M Hastings

Publications and source records attributed to A M Hastings.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

Student perceptions of a new integrated course in clinical methods for medical undergraduates.

CONTEXT: In line with recent General Medical Council recommendations a new, 8-week integrated course in clinical methods has been introduced into the undergraduate curriculum at Leicester University. OBJECTIVES: To describe student perceptions of the course and to identify areas for improvement. DESIGN: A questionnaire survey. SETTINGS: These were 50 general practices, three teaching hospitals and the academic Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care. SUBJECTS: A total of 180 third- and fourth-year medical students. RESULTS: The questionnaires were completed by 93% of students. The latter expressed higher satisfaction with practice teaching compared with hospital teaching, on a 5-point scale, with regard to questions on 'teaching content' (4.0 vs. 2.7, P < 0.0001) and 'teaching process' (4.1 vs. 2.7 P < 0.0001), which was reinforced by free text comments. Of the respondents, 92% agreed that their teaching practice had satisfied the required teaching timetable and 87% of students found their departmental tutor enthusiastic and stimulating. CONCLUSION: It is possible to deliver an integrated course in clinical methods, teaching generic clinical skills, in a mix of hospital and practice settings. Nevertheless there were substantial differences in student perceptions of the relative quality and impact of teaching in the two settings. This may be related to the more detailed programme of preparation of practice teachers and the greater extent to which practice teachers were required, and able, to create protected time for the teaching task. These differences should be minimized if hospital teachers undergo similar preparation for the teaching task and have similar levels of protected teaching time.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2000

Formative assessment of the consultation performance of medical students in the setting of general practice using a modified version of the leicester assessment package.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of a modified version of the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP) in the formative assessment of the consultation performance of medical students with particular reference to validity, inter-assessor reliability, acceptability, feasibility and educational impact. DESIGN: 180 third and fourth year Leicester medical students were directly observed consulting with six general practice patients and independently assessed by a pair of assessors. A total of 70 practice and 16 departmental assessors took part. Performance scores were subjected to generalizability analysis and students' views of the assessment were gathered by questionnaire. RESULTS: Four of the five categories of consultation performance (Interviewing and history taking, Patient management, Problem solving and Behaviour and relationship with patients) were assessed in over 99% of consultations and Physical examination was assessed in 94%. Seventy-six percent of assessors reported that the case mix was 'satisfactory' and 20% that it was 'borderline'; 85% of students believed it to have been satisfactory. Generalizability analysis indicates that two independent assessors assessing the performance of students across six consultations would achieve a reliability of 0.94 in making pass or fail decisions. Ninety-eight percent of students perceived that their particular strengths and weaknesses were correctly identified, 99% that they were given specific advice on how to improve their performance and 98% believed that the feedback they had received would have long-term benefit. CONCLUSIONS: The modified version of the LAP is valid, reliable and feasible in formative assessment of the consultation performance of medical students. Furthermore, almost all students found the process fair and believed it was likely to lead to improvements in their consultation performance. This approach may also be applicable to regulatory assessment as it accurately identifies students at the pass/fail margin.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1997

Comparison of out of hours care provided by patients' own general practitioners and commercial deputising services: a randomised controlled trial. I: The process of care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the process of out of hours care provided by general practitioners from patients' own practices and by commercial deputising services. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Four urban areas in Manchester, Salford, Stockport, and Leicester. SUBJECTS: 2152 patients who requested out of hours care, and 49 practice doctors and 183 deputising doctors (61% local principals) who responded to those requests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Response to call, time to visit, prescribing, and hospital admissions. RESULTS: 1046 calls were dealt with by practice doctors and 1106 by deputising doctors. Practice doctors were more likely to give telephone advice (20.2% v 0.72% of calls) and to visit more quickly than deputising doctors (median delay 35 minutes v 52 minutes). Practice doctors were less likely than deputising doctors to issue a prescription (56.1% v 63.2% of patients) or to prescribe an antibiotic (43.7% v 61.3% of prescriptions issued) and more likely to prescribe genetic drugs (58.4% v 32.1% of drugs prescribed), cheaper drugs (mean cost per prescription pounds 3.28 v pounds 5.04), and drugs in a predefined out of hours formulary (49.8% v 41.1% of drugs prescribed). There was no significant difference in the number of hospital admissions. CONCLUSIONS: By contrast with practice doctors, deputising doctors providing out of hours care less readily give telephone advice, take longer to visit at home, and have patterns of prescribing that may be less discriminating.

Appointments and Schedules↗
PubMed1997

Comparison of out of hours care provided by patients' own general practitioners and commercial deputising services: a randomised controlled trial. II: The outcome of care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of out of hours care given by general practitioners from patients' own practices and by commercial deputising services. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Four urban areas in Manchester, Salford, Stockport, and Leicester. SUBJECTS: 2152 patients who requested out of hours care, and 49 practice doctors and 183 deputising doctors (61% local principals in general practice) who responded to the requests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health status outcome, patient satisfaction, and subsequent health service use. RESULTS: Patients seen by deputising doctors were less satisfied with the care they received. The mean overall satisfaction score for practice doctors was 70.7 (95% confidence interval 68.1 to 73.2) and for deputising doctors 61.8 (59.9 to 63.7). The greatest difference in satisfaction was with the delay in visiting. There were no differences in the change in health or overall health status measured 24 to 120 hours after the out of hours call or subsequent use of the health service in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients are more satisfied with the out of hours care provided by practice doctors than that provided by deputising doctors. Organisation of doctors into large groups may produce lower levels of patient satisfaction, especially when associated with increased delays in the time taken to visit. There seem to be no appreciable differences in health outcome between the two types of service.

Appointments and Schedules↗
PubMed1997

Reliability and validity of a new measure of patient satisfaction with out of hours primary medical care in the United Kingdom: development of a patient questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a reliable, valid measure of patient satisfaction with out of hours care suitable for large scale service evaluation. DESIGN: Focus group meetings and semistructured interviews with patients to identify issues of importance to patients and possible questionnaire items; interviews and two pilot studies to test and identify new questionnaire items; modification or removal of items to eliminate ambiguity and reduce non-response and skewed responses; questionnaire survey of out of hours care. SETTING: Greater Manchester and Leicester. SUBJECTS: 11 general practice patients participated in the focus groups and 28 in the semistructured interviews; 41 in the preliminary interviews; 41 and 378 in the postal pilots; and 1466 in the survey of out of hours care. RESULTS: A 32 item questionnaire was developed. Component analysis indicated seven scales (satisfaction with communication and management, doctor's attitude, continuity of care, delay until visit, access to out of hours care, initial contact person, telephone advice) related to overall satisfaction and containing issues identified as important to patients. Levels of reliability were satisfactory, Cronbach's alpha correlation coefficient exceeding 0.60 for all scales. CONCLUSION: A reliable, valid measure of patient satisfaction has been developed, suitable for large scale evaluation of out of hours care.

Adolescent↗