Time to think? Questionnaire survey of pre-registration house officers' experiences of critical appraisal in the Mersey Deanery.

摘要

CONTEXT: Workload pressures may lead pre-registration house officers (PRHOs) to undervalue critical appraisal and thinking skills. This study aimed to explore Mersey Deanery PRHOs' attitudes, experiences and perceived readiness for practising evidence-based medicine with critical appraisal skills. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 157 PRHOs from 5 postgraduate centres in the UK, using a semistructured questionnaire, at the beginning and end of the pre-registration year. Main outcome measures were level of agreement with closed statements exploring experiences and opinions about critical appraisal skills and evidence-based practice. Open questions explored personal experiences. RESULTS: Most PRHOs (69%) felt medical school prepared them to use critical appraisal skills and perceived such skills as relevant (63%). Fewer felt that their clinical work was based on best available evidence (57%). The busier the PRHOs, the less likely they were to agree that their practice followed best evidence. The PRHOswere more likely to feel supported and that their practice was evidence-based at the end of the year. Responders identified several reasons for their practice not being evidence-based, including workload, lack of skills, deferring to senior colleagues, and non-conducive hospital culture. CONCLUSIONS: The nature of PRHO work still mitigates against critical thinking and appraising evidence, with a lack of protected time and perceived inconsistent support from educational supervisors. Many PRHOs rely entirely on evidence-based summaries and guidelines from others. The PRHO year is a period of crucial transition, however, and critical appraisal skills and evidence-based approaches need developing post-qualification, with sufficient protected time for their integration into practice. Foundation year reforms reinforce such requirements.