首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Education >Two birds with one stone: experiences of combining clinical and research training in addiction medicine
【24h】

Two birds with one stone: experiences of combining clinical and research training in addiction medicine

机译:两鸟一石:成瘾医学临床与研究训练相结合的经验

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Despite a large evidence-base upon which to base clinical practice, most health systems have not combined the training of healthcare providers in addiction medicine and research. As such, addiction care is often lacking, or not based on evidence or best practices. We undertook a qualitative study to assess the experiences of physicians who completed a clinician-scientist training programme in addiction medicine within a hospital setting. Methods We interviewed physicians from the St. Paul’s Hospital Goldcorp Addiction Medicine Fellowship and learners from the hospital’s academic Addiction Medicine Consult Team in Vancouver, Canada ( N =?26). They included psychiatrists, internal medicine and family medicine physicians, faculty, mentors, medical students and residents. All received both addiction medicine and research training. Drawing on Kirkpatrick’s model of evaluating training programmes, we analysed the interviews thematically using qualitative data analysis software (Nvivo 10). Results We identified five themes relating to learning experience that were influential: (i) attitude, (ii) knowledge, (iii) skill, (iv) behaviour and (v) patient outcome. The presence of a supportive learning environment, flexibility in time lines, highly structured rotations, and clear guidance regarding development of research products facilitated clinician-scientist training. Competing priorities, including clinical and family responsibilities, hindered training. Conclusions Combined training in addiction medicine and research is feasible and acceptable for current doctors and physicians in training. However, there are important barriers to overcome and improved understanding of the experience of addiction physicians in the clinician-scientist track is required to improve curricula and research productivity.
机译:背景尽管尽管有大量的证据可作为临床实践的依据,但大多数卫生系统仍未将成瘾医学和研究方面的医疗保健人员培训结合起来。因此,通常缺乏戒毒服务,或者不是基于证据或最佳实践。我们进行了定性研究,以评估在医院环境中完成过成瘾医学临床医生-科学家培训计划的医师的经验。方法我们采访了圣保罗医院Goldcorp成瘾医学研究金的医生以及该医院位于加拿大温哥华的学术成瘾医学咨询小组的学生(N = 26)。他们包括精神科医生,内科和家庭医学医师,教师,导师,医学生和居民。所有人都接受了成瘾医学和研究培训。利用柯克帕特里克(Kirkpatrick)评估培训计划的模型,我们使用定性数据分析软件(Nvivo 10)对访谈进行了主题分析。结果我们确定了与学习经历有关的五个主题,这些主题具有影响力:(i)态度,(ii)知识,(iii)技能,(iv)行为和(v)患者结果。支持性学习环境的存在,时间轴的灵活性,高度结构化的轮换以及有关研究产品开发的明确指导有助于临床医生-科学家的培训。竞争的重点,包括临床和家庭责任,阻碍了培训。结论成瘾医学和研究相结合的培训是可行的,并且对于当前的医生和医师来说是可以接受的。但是,要提高课程和研究效率,需要克服重要的障碍,并且需要更好地理解成瘾医师在临床医生-科学家方面的经验。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号