Developing and piloting a resource for training assessors in use of the Mini-CEX (mini clinical evaluation exercise).

The assessment of undergraduate medical students in the clinical setting has become a key priority for medical educators. Facilitating the successful translation of undergraduate theoretical knowledge into safe and appropriate postgraduate clinical practice represents a challenge in medical education [1]. Poor clinical performance of newly qualified doctors has been highlighted as a major issue relating to patient safety [2]. Performance based assessment in the undergraduate setting may assist in addressing this issue by assessing ‘doing’ rather than ‘knowing’. The mini clinical evaluation exercise (Mini-CEX) is a formative assessment used to assess the performance of medical students in a clinical context. It incorporates assessment by, and feedback from, an assessor, based on the direct observation of a student–patient consultation [3]. Conducted in a series of stages, the Mini-CEX allows focused assessment of key competencies (see Box 1) [3]

Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: addressing the challenges

Epilepsy is associated with a higher rate of premature death than the general population and the commonest cause of epilepsy mortality is sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). It is difficult to quantify because of the variable reporting of this cause of death. Death occurs due to autonomic deregulation of cardio-respiratory pathways as a result of seizures. Measures to reduce cardio-respiratory dysfunction are discussed together with the importance of seizure control in preventing SUDEP. The role of seizure detection devices, anti-epileptic drugs and the importance of providing information about SUDEP to people with epilepsy are highlighted. There is increasing interest in SUDEP and some current initiatives are discussed

The development of academic family medicine in central and eastern Europe since 1990

Background: Since the early 1990s former communist countries have been reforming their health care systems, emphasizing the key role of primary care and recognizing family medicine as a specialty and an academic discipline. This study assesses the level of academic development of the discipline characterised by education and research in central and eastern European (CEE) countries. Methods: A key informants study, using a questionnaire developed on the basis of a systematic literature review and panel discussions, conducted in 11 central and eastern European countries and Russia. Results: Family medicine in CEE countries is now formally recognized as a medical specialty and successfully introduced into medical training at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Almost all universities have FM/GP departments, but only a few of them are led by general practitioners. The specialist training programmes in all countries except Russia fulfil the recommendations of the European Parliament. Structured support for research in FM/GP is not always available. However specific scientific organisations function in almost all countries except Russia. Scientific conferences are regularly organised in all the countries, but peer-reviewed journals are published in only half of them. Conclusions: Family medicine has a relatively strong position in medical education in central and eastern Europe, but research in family practice is less developed. Although the position of the discipline at the universities is not very strong, most of the CEE countries can serve as an example of successful academic development for countries southern Europe, where family medicine is still not fully recognised

The development of academic family medicine in central and eastern Europe since 1990

BACKGROUND: Since the early 1990s former communist countries have been reforming their health care systems, emphasizing the key role of primary care and recognizing family medicine as a specialty and an academic discipline. This study assesses the level of academic development of the discipline characterised by education and research in central and eastern European (CEE) countries. METHODS: A key informants study, using a questionnaire developed on the basis of a systematic literature review and panel discussions, conducted in 11 central and eastern European countries and Russia. RESULTS: Family medicine in CEE countries is now formally recognized as a medical specialty and successfully introduced into medical training at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Almost all universities have FM/GP departments, but only a few of them are led by general practitioners. The specialist training programmes in all countries except Russia fulfil the recommendations of the European Parliament. Structured support for research in FM/GP is not always available. However specific scientific organisations function in almost all countries except Russia. Scientific conferences are regularly organised in all the countries, but peer-reviewed journals are published in only half of them. CONCLUSIONS: Family medicine has a relatively strong position in medical education in central and eastern Europe, but research in family practice is less developed. Although the position of the discipline at the universities is not very strong, most of the CEE countries can serve as an example of successful academic development for countries southern Europe, where family medicine is still not fully recognised

Preventing and Lessening Exacerbations of Asthma in School-aged children Associated with a New Term (PLEASANT): recruiting primary care research sites - the PLEASANT experience

Background: Recruitment of general practices and their patients into research studies is frequently reported as a challenge. The Preventing and Lessening Exacerbations of Asthma in School-aged children Associated with a New Term (PLEASANT) trial recruited 142 general practices, across England and Wales and delivered the study intervention to time and target. Aims: To describe the process of recruitment used within the cluster randomised PLEASANT trial and present results on factors that influenced recruitment. Methods: Data were collected on the number of and types of contact used to gain expression of interest and subsequent randomisation into the PLEASANT trial. Practice size and previous research experience were also collected. Results: The mean number of contacts required to gain expression of interest were m=3.01 (s.d. 1.6) and total number of contacts from initial invitation to randomisation m=6.8 (s.d. 3.5). Previous randomised controlled trial involvement (hazard ratio (HR)=1.81 (confidence interval (CI) 95%, 1.55–2.11) P<0.001) and number of studies a practice had previously engaged in (odds ratio (OR) 1.91 (CI 95%, (1.52–2.42)) P<0.001), significantly influenced whether a practice would participate in PLEASANT. Practice size was not a significant deciding factor (OR=1.04 (95% CI 0.99–1.08) P=0.137). Conclusions: Recruitment to time and target can be achieved in general practice. The amount of resource required for site recruitment should not, however, be underestimated and multiple strategies for contacting practices should be considered. General practitioners with more research experience are more likely to participate in studies

Changing antiepilepsy drug-prescribing trends in women with epilepsy in the UK and Ireland and the impact on major congenital malformations

Objectives: After 20 years of data collection, pregnancy registers have informed prescribing practice. Various populations show trends for a reduction in valproate prescribing, which is associated with an increased risk of anatomical teratogenesis and neurodevelopmental effects in those exposed in utero. Our aim was to determine if any shifts in prescribing trends have occurred in the UK and Ireland Epilepsy and Pregnancy Register cohort and to assess if there had been any change in the overall major congenital malformation (MCM) rate over time. Methods: The UK and Ireland Epilepsy and Pregnancy Register, a prospective, observational, registration and follow-up study established in 1996, was used to determine the changes in antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) utilised during pregnancy and the MCM rate between 1996 and 2016. Linear regression analysis was used to assess changes in AED utilisation, and Poisson regression was used for the analysis of trends in the MCM rates. Results: Outcome data for 9247 pregnancies showed a stable percentage of monotherapy to polytherapy prescribing habits over time. After Bonferroni correction, statistically significant (p<0.003) changes were found in monotherapy prescribing with increases in lamotrigine and levetiracetam and decreases in valproate and carbamazepine use. Between 1996 and 2016, the total MCM rate showed a 2.1% reduction per year (incidence risk ratio 0.979 (95% CIs 0.956 to 1.002) but Poisson regression analysis showed that this was not statistically significant p=0.08). Conclusion: Significant changes are seen in the prescribing habits in this cohort over 20 years, but a statistically significant change in the MCM rate was not detected. This work should be replicated on a larger scale to determine if significant changes are occurring in the MCM rate, which would allow a robust economic estimate of the benefits of improvements in prescribing practice and the personal effect of such changes

Osteo-cise: Strong Bones for Life: protocol for a community-based randomised controlled trial of a multi-modal exercise and osteoporosis education program for older adults at risk of falls and fractures

Background : Osteoporosis affects over 220 million people worldwide, and currently there is no \u27cure\u27 for the disease. Thus, there is a need to develop evidence-based, safe and acceptable prevention strategies at the population level that target multiple risk factors for fragility fractures to reduce the health and economic burden of the condition. Methods : The \u27Osteo-cise: Strong Bones for Life\u27 study will investigate the effectiveness and feasibility of a multi-component targeted exercise, osteoporosis education/awareness and behavioural change program for improving bone health and muscle function, and reducing falls risk in community-dwelling older adults at an increased risk of fracture. Men and women aged 60 years or above will participate in an 18-month randomised controlled trial comprising a 12-month structured and supervised community-based program and a 6-month \u27research to practise\u27 translational phase. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the \u27Osteo-cise\u27 intervention or a self-management control group. The intervention will comprise a multi-modal exercise program incorporating high velocity progressive resistance training, moderate impact weight-bearing exercise and high challenging balance exercises performed three times weekly at local community-based fitness centres. A behavioural change program will be used to enhance exercise adoption and adherence to the program. Community-based osteoporosis education seminars will be conducted to improve participant knowledge and understanding of the risk factors and preventative measures for osteoporosis, falls and fractures. The primary outcomes measures, to be collected at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months, will include DXA-derived hip and spine bone mineral density measurements and functional muscle power (timed stair-climb test). Secondary outcomes measures include: MRI-assessed distal femur and proximal tibia trabecular bone micro-architecture, lower limb and back maximal muscle strength, balance and function (four square step test, functional reach test, timed up-and-go test and 30-second sit-to-stand), falls incidence and health-related quality of life. Cost-effectiveness will also be assessed. Discussion : The findings from the Osteo-cise: Strong Bones for Life study will provide new information on the efficacy of a targeted multi-modal community-based exercise program incorporating high velocity resistance training, together with an osteoporosis education and behavioural change program for improving multiple risk factors for falls and fracture in older adults at risk of fragility fracture.<br /

The language of sedation in end-of-life care: The ethical reasoning of care providers in three countries

The application of ethically controversial medical procedures may differ from one place to another. Drawing on a keyword and text-mining analysis of 156 interviews with doctors and nurses involved in end-of-life care ('care providers'), differences between countries in care providers' ethical rationales for the use of sedation are reported. In the United Kingdom, an emphasis on titrating doses proportionately against symptoms is more likely, maintaining consciousness where possible. The potential harms of sedation are perceived to be the potential hastening of social as well as biological death. In Belgium and the Netherlands, although there is concern to distinguish the practice from euthanasia, rapid inducement of deep unconsciousness is more acceptable to care providers. This is often perceived to be a proportionate response to unbearable suffering in a context where there is also greater pressure to hasten dying from relatives and others. This means that sedation is more likely to be organised like euthanasia, as the end 'moment' is reached, and family farewells are organised before the patient is made unconscious for ever. Medical and nursing practices are partly responses to factors outside the place of care, such as legislation and public sentiment. Dutch guidelines for sedation largely tally with the practices prevalent in the Netherlands and Belgium, in contrast with those produced by the more international European Association for Palliative Care whose authors describe an ethical framework closer to that reportedly used by UK care providers.This work was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (UK) [grant no: RES-062-23-2078], the Research Foundation Flanders (BE), the Flemish Cancer Association (BE), the Research Council of Ghent University (BE), the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NL and the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (NL)

Whole-genome sequencing reveals host factors underlying critical COVID-19

Critical COVID-19 is caused by immune-mediated inflammatory lung injury. Host genetic variation influences the development of illness requiring critical care1 or hospitalization2–4 after infection with SARS-CoV-2. The GenOMICC (Genetics of Mortality in Critical Care) study enables the comparison of genomes from individuals who are critically ill with those of population controls to find underlying disease mechanisms. Here we use whole-genome sequencing in 7,491 critically ill individuals compared with 48,400 controls to discover and replicate 23 independent variants that significantly predispose to critical COVID-19. We identify 16 new independent associations, including variants within genes that are involved in interferon signalling (IL10RB and PLSCR1), leucocyte differentiation (BCL11A) and blood-type antigen secretor status (FUT2). Using transcriptome-wide association and colocalization to infer the effect of gene expression on disease severity, we find evidence that implicates multiple genes—including reduced expression of a membrane flippase (ATP11A), and increased expression of a mucin (MUC1)—in critical disease. Mendelian randomization provides evidence in support of causal roles for myeloid cell adhesion molecules (SELE, ICAM5 and CD209) and the coagulation factor F8, all of which are potentially druggable targets. Our results are broadly consistent with a multi-component model of COVID-19 pathophysiology, in which at least two distinct mechanisms can predispose to life-threatening disease: failure to control viral replication; or an enhanced tendency towards pulmonary inflammation and intravascular coagulation. We show that comparison between cases of critical illness and population controls is highly efficient for the detection of therapeutically relevant mechanisms of disease

Whole-genome sequencing reveals host factors underlying critical COVID-19

Critical COVID-19 is caused by immune-mediated inflammatory lung injury. Host genetic variation influences the development of illness requiring critical care1 or hospitalization2,3,4 after infection with SARS-CoV-2. The GenOMICC (Genetics of Mortality in Critical Care) study enables the comparison of genomes from individuals who are critically ill with those of population controls to find underlying disease mechanisms. Here we use whole-genome sequencing in 7,491 critically ill individuals compared with 48,400 controls to discover and replicate 23 independent variants that significantly predispose to critical COVID-19. We identify 16 new independent associations, including variants within genes that are involved in interferon signalling (IL10RB and PLSCR1), leucocyte differentiation (BCL11A) and blood-type antigen secretor status (FUT2). Using transcriptome-wide association and colocalization to infer the effect of gene expression on disease severity, we find evidence that implicates multiple genes—including reduced expression of a membrane flippase (ATP11A), and increased expression of a mucin (MUC1)—in critical disease. Mendelian randomization provides evidence in support of causal roles for myeloid cell adhesion molecules (SELE, ICAM5 and CD209) and the coagulation factor F8, all of which are potentially druggable targets. Our results are broadly consistent with a multi-component model of COVID-19 pathophysiology, in which at least two distinct mechanisms can predispose to life-threatening disease: failure to control viral replication; or an enhanced tendency towards pulmonary inflammation and intravascular coagulation. We show that comparison between cases of critical illness and population controls is highly efficient for the detection of therapeutically relevant mechanisms of disease