Premium
Learning opportunities for Australian prevocational hospital doctors: exposure, perceived quality and desired methods of learning
Author(s) -
Dent Andrew W,
Crotty Brendan,
Cuddihy Helen L,
Duns Glenn C,
Benjamin Joan,
Jordon Carol A,
Satchell Jacqueline F,
Farish Stephen,
Weiland Tracey J,
Jolly Brian C
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
medical journal of australia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.904
H-Index - 131
eISSN - 1326-5377
pISSN - 0025-729X
DOI - 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00314.x
Subject(s) - preparedness , fidelity , medical education , quality (philosophy) , medicine , perception , cohort , nursing , family medicine , psychology , engineering , management , neuroscience , electrical engineering , economics , philosophy , epistemology
Objective: To survey prevocational doctors working in Australian hospitals on aspects of postgraduate learning. Participants and setting: 470 prevocational doctors in 36 health services in Australia, August 2003 to October 2004. Design: Cross‐sectional cohort survey with a mix of ordinal multicategory questions and free text. Main outcome measures: Perceived preparedness for aspects of clinical practice; perceptions of the quantity and usefulness of current teaching and learning methods and desired future exposure to learning methods. Results: 64% (299/467) of responding doctors felt generally prepared for their job, 91% (425/469) felt prepared for dealing with patients, and 70% (325/467) for dealing with relatives. A minority felt prepared for medicolegal problems (23%, 106/468), clinical emergencies (31%, 146/469), choosing a career (40%, 188/468), or performing procedures (45%, 213/469). Adequate contact with registrars was reported by 90% (418/465) and adequate contact with consultants by 56% (257/466); 20% (94/467) reported exposure to clinical skills training and 11% (38/356) to high‐fidelity simulation. Informal registrar contact was described as useful or very useful by 94% (433/463), and high‐fidelity simulation by 83% (179/216). Most prevocational doctors would prefer more formal instruction from their registrars (84%, 383/456) and consultants (81%, 362/447); 84% (265/316) want increased exposure to high‐fidelity simulation and 81% (283/350) to professional college tutorials. Conclusion: Our findings should assist planning and development of training programs for prevocational doctors in Australian hospitals.