Effects of an educational patient safety campaign on patients' safety behaviours and adverse events

Rationale, aims and objectives  The study aims to investigate the effects of a patient safety advisory on patients' risk perceptions, perceived behavioural control, performance of safety behaviours and experience of adverse incidents. Method  Quasi-experimental intervention study with non-equivalent group comparison was used. Patients admitted to the surgical department of a Swiss large non-university hospital were included. Patients in the intervention group received a safety advisory at their first clinical encounter. Outcomes were assessed using a questionnaire at discharge. Odds ratios for control versus intervention group were calculated. Regression analysis was used to model the effects of the intervention and safety behaviours on the experience of safety incidents. Results  Two hundred eighteen patients in the control and 202 in the intervention group completed the survey (75 and 77% response rates, respectively). Patients in the intervention group were less likely to feel poorly informed about medical errors (OR = 0.55, P = 0.043). There were 73.1% in the intervention and 84.3% in the control group who underestimated the risk for infection (OR = 0.51, CI 0.31-0.84, P = 0.009). Perceived behavioural control was lower in the control group (meanCon  = 3.2, meanInt  = 3.5, P = 0.010). Performance of safety-related behaviours was unaffected by the intervention. Patients in the intervention group were less likely to experience any safety-related incident or unsafe situation (OR for intervention group = 0.57, CI 0.38-0.87, P = 0.009). There were no differences in concerns for errors during hospitalization. There were 96% of patients (intervention) who would recommend other patients to read the advisory. Conclusions  The results suggest that the safety advisory decreases experiences of adverse events and unsafe situations. It renders awareness and perceived behavioural control without increasing concerns for safety and can thus serve as a useful instrument for communication about safety between health care workers and patients.

Early developmental, temperamental and educational problems in ‘substance use disorder’ patients with and without ADHD. Does ADHD make a difference?

Introduction: The prevalence of ADHD among patients with substance use disorder (SUD) is substantial. This study addressed the following research questions: Are early developmental, temperamental and educational problems overrepresented among SUD patients with ADHD compared to SUD patients without ADHD? Do this comorbid group receive early help for their ADHD, and are there signs of self-medicating with illicit central stimulants? Method: An international, multi-centre cross-sectional study was carried out involving seven European countries, with 1205 patients in treatment for SUD. The mean age was 40 years and 27% of the sample was female. All par- ticipants were interviewed with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus and the Conners' Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV. Results: SUD patients with ADHD (n = 196; 16.3% of the total sample) had a significantly slower infant develop- ment than SUD patients without ADHD (n = 1,009; 83.4%), had greater problems controlling their temperament, and had lower educational attainment. Only 24 (12%) of the current ADHD positive patients had been diagnosed and treated during childhood and/or adolescence. Finally, SUD patients with ADHD were more likely to have central stimulants or cannabis as their primary substance of abuse, whereas alcohol use was more likely to be the primary substance of abuse in SUD patients without ADHD. Conclusion: The results emphasize the importance of early identification of ADHD and targeted interventions in the health and school system, as well as in the addiction field.

The Social Geography of Education: Neighborhood, Class Composition, and the Educational Achievement of Elementary School Students in Zurich, Switzerland

Despite an impressive amount of research and policy intervention no robust pattern of neighborhood effects on educational attainment has previously been identified. Adequate theoretical modeling and the sensitivity of the results to the method of the study are the major challenges in this area of research. This paper elaborates the social mechanisms of neighborhood effects and applies various methodological approaches to test them. Using data from Switzerland, the research reported here has detected heterogeneous effects of neighborhood on elementary school students’ educational achievement in Zurich. Although modest in comparison with the effects of classroom composition, these effects appear to be mediated primarily through social integration into a local peer network and are differentiated according to students’ gender and their social origin.

Computer-based summative assessment of clinical reasoning in clerkships: A mixed-method comparison of key feature problems with case-based multiple choice questions

Background: It is yet unclear if there are differences between using electronic key feature problems (KFPs) or electronic case-based multiple choice questions (cbMCQ) for the assessment of clinical decision making. Summary of Work: Fifth year medical students were exposed to clerkships which ended with a summative exam. Assessment of knowledge per exam was done by 6-9 KFPs, 9-20 cbMCQ and 9-28 MC questions. Each KFP consisted of a case vignette and three key features (KF) using “long menu” as question format. We sought students’ perceptions of the KFPs and cbMCQs in focus groups (n of students=39). Furthermore statistical data of 11 exams (n of students=377) concerning the KFPs and (cb)MCQs were compared. Summary of Results: The analysis of the focus groups resulted in four themes reflecting students’ perceptions of KFPs and their comparison with (cb)MCQ: KFPs were perceived as (i) more realistic, (ii) more difficult, (iii) more motivating for the intense study of clinical reasoning than (cb)MCQ and (iv) showed an overall good acceptance when some preconditions are taken into account. The statistical analysis revealed that there was no difference in difficulty; however KFP showed a higher discrimination and reliability (G-coefficient) even when corrected for testing times. Correlation of the different exam parts was intermediate. Conclusions: Students perceived the KFPs as more motivating for the study of clinical reasoning. Statistically KFPs showed a higher discrimination and higher reliability than cbMCQs. Take-home messages: Including KFPs with long menu questions into summative clerkship exams seems to offer positive educational effects.

Computerbasierte Prüfung von klinischem Denken in der klinischen Ausbildung: Ein Mixed-Method Vergleich von Key Feature Problemen mit fallbasierten Multiple Choice Typ A Fragen

Fragestellung/Einleitung: Es ist unklar inwiefern Unterschiede bestehen im Einsatz von Key Feature Problemen (KFP) mit Long Menu Fragen und fallbasierten Typ A Fragen (FTA) für die Überprüfung des klinischen Denkens (Clinical Reasoning) in der klinischen Ausbildung von Medizinstudierenden. Methoden: Medizinstudierende des fünften Studienjahres nahmen an ihrer klinischen Pädiatrie-Rotation teil, die mit einer summativen Prüfung endete. Die Überprüfung des Wissen wurde pro Prüfung elektronisch mit 6-9 KFP [1], [3], 9-20 FTA und 9-28 nichtfallbasierten Multiple Choice Fragen (NFTA) durchgeführt. Jedes KFP bestand aus einer Fallvignette und drei Key Features und nutzen ein sog. Long Menu [4] als Antwortformat. Wir untersuchten die Perzeption der KFP und FTA in Focus Gruppen [2] (n of students=39). Weiterhin wurden die statistischen Kennwerte der KFP und FTA von 11 Prüfungen (n of students=377) verglichen. Ergebnisse: Die Analyse der Fokusgruppen resultierte in vier Themen, die die Perzeption der KFP und deren Vergleich mit FTA darstellten: KFP wurden als 1. realistischer, 2. schwerer, und 3. motivierender für das intensive Selbststudium des klinischen Denkens als FTA aufgenommen und zeigten 4. insgesamt eine gute Akzeptanz sofern gewisse Voraussetzungen berücksichtigt werden. Die statistische Auswertung zeigte keinen Unterschied im Schwierigkeitsgrad; jedoch zeigten die KFP eine höhere Diskrimination und Reliabilität (G-coefficient) selbst wenn für die Prüfungszeit korrigiert wurde. Die Korrelation der verschiedenen Prüfungsteile war mittel. Diskussion/Schlussfolgerung: Die Studierenden erfuhren die KFP als motivierenden für das Selbststudium des klinischen Denkens. Statistisch zeigten die KFP eine grössere Diskrimination und höhere Relibilität als die FTA. Der Einbezug von KFP mit Long Menu in Prüfungen des klinischen Studienabschnitts erscheint vielversprechend und einen „educational effect“ zu haben.