Essential competencies in prescribing : A first european cross-sectional study among 895 final-year medical students

European medical students should have acquired adequate prescribing competencies before graduation, but it is not known whether this is the case. In this international multicenter study, we evaluated the essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) of final-year medical students across Europe. In a cross-sectional design, 26 medical schools from 17 European countries were asked to administer a standardized assessment and questionnaire to 50 final-year students. Although there were differences between schools, our results show an overall lack of essential prescribing competencies among final-year students in Europe. Students had a poor knowledge of drug interactions and contraindications, and chose inappropriate therapies for common diseases or made prescribing errors. Our results suggest that undergraduate teaching in CPT is inadequate in many European schools, leading to incompetent prescribers and potentially unsafe patient care. A European core curriculum with clear learning outcomes and assessments should be urgently developed

A novel approach to teaching pharmacotherapeutics-feasibility of the learner-centered student-run clinic

ᅟ: Medical students should be better prepared for their future role as prescribers. A new educational concept to achieve this is learning by doing. This encompasses legitimate, context-based training and gives students responsibility as early as possible in their medical education. Student-run clinics (SRCs) are an example of this concept. AIM: Describe the development of a new SRC for insured patients, primarily focused on medical (pharmacotherapy) education, the learner-centered student-run clinic (LC-SRC), and its feasibility. METHODS: Teams each comprising of three students (first, third, and fifth year) performed consultations including proposing management plans, all under the supervision of an internist. Patients were voluntary selected from the internal medicine outpatient clinic for follow-up in the LC-SRC. Feasibility was evaluated using a set of questionnaires for patients, supervisors, and students. RESULTS: In total, 31 consultations were conducted; 31 students and 4 clinical specialists participated. A pharmacotherapeutic treatment plan was drawn up in 33 % of the consultations. Patients were content with the care provided and rated the consultation with a 7.9 (SD 1.21) (1(min)-10(max)). Supervisors regarded LC-SRC safe for patients with guaranteed quality of care. They found the LC-SRC a valuable tool in medical education although it was time-consuming. Students appreciated their (new) responsibility for patient care and considered the LC-SRC a very valuable extracurricular activity. DISCUSSION: The LC-SRC is feasible, and all participants considered it to be a valuable educational activity. It offers students the opportunity to learn in a real interprofessional and longitudinal setting for their future role as prescriber in clinical practice. The benefits and learner effects need to be investigated in a larger study with a longer follow-up. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00228-015-1916-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Pharmacovigilance training for specialist oncology nurses-a two way evaluation

Background: In a new prescribing qualifcation course for specialist oncology nurses, we thought it important to emphasize pharma-covigilance and adverse drug reaction (ADR)-reporting. To this end, our aim was to develop and evaluate an ADR reporting assignment for specialist oncology nurses. Methods: The quality of report documentation was assessed with the 'Clinical Documentation tool to assess Individual Case Safety Reports' (ClinDoc). The relevance of the reports was evaluated in terms of ADR seriousness, the listing for additional monitoring of the drug by European Medicines Agency (EMA), and lack of labelling information about the ADR. Nurses' opinions of the assignment were evaluated using an E-survey. Results: Thirty-three ADRs were reported, 32 (97%) of which were well documented according to ClinDoc. Thirteen ADRs (39%) were 'serious' according to CIOMS criteria. In 5 cases (15%) the suspect drugs were listed for additional monitoring by EMA and in 7 cases (21%) the ADR was not mentioned in the Summary of Product Characteristics. Twenty-fve (78%) of the 32 enrolled nurses completed the E-survey. Most were > 45 years of age (68%), female (92%), and had extensive clinical experience (6-33 years). All agreed or completely agreed that the reporting assignment was useful, that it ftted in daily practice, and that it increased their attention for medi-cation/patient safety. A large majority (84%) agreed the assignment changed how they dealt with ADRs. Conclusions: Specialist oncology nurses are capable of reporting ADRs, and they considered the assignment useful. The assignment yielded valuable, relevant, and well-documented ADR reports for pharmacovigilance practice

Essential diseases in prescribing: A national Delphi study towards a core curriculum in pharmacotherapy education

Item does not contain fulltex