Literature DB >> 29315721

Do final-year medical students have sufficient prescribing competencies? A systematic literature review.

David J Brinkman1,2, Jelle Tichelaar1,2, Sanne Graaf1, René H J Otten3, Milan C Richir1,2, Michiel A van Agtmael1,2.   

Abstract

AIMS: Prescribing errors are an important cause of patient safety incidents and are frequently caused by junior doctors. This might be because the prescribing competence of final-year medical students is poor as a result of inadequate clinical pharmacology and therapeutic (CPT) education. We reviewed the literature to investigate which prescribing competencies medical students should have acquired in order to prescribe safely and effectively, and whether these have been attained by the time they graduate.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and ERIC databases were searched from the earliest dates up to and including January 2017, using the terms 'prescribing', 'competence' and 'medical students' in combination. Articles describing or evaluating essential prescribing competencies of final-year medical students were included.
RESULTS: Twenty-five articles describing, and 47 articles evaluating, the prescribing competencies of final-year students were included. Although there seems to be some agreement, we found no clear consensus among CPT teachers on which prescribing competencies medical students should have when they graduate. Studies showed that students had a general lack of preparedness, self-confidence, knowledge and skills, specifically regarding general and antimicrobial prescribing and pharmacovigilance. However, the results should be interpreted with caution, given the heterogeneity and methodological weaknesses of the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable evidence that final-year students have insufficient competencies to prescribe safely and effectively, although there is a need for a greater consensus among CPT teachers on the required competencies. Changes in undergraduate CPT education are urgently required in order to improve the prescribing of future doctors.
© 2018 VU University Medical Centre. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical pharmacology; competence; medical curriculum; medical student; pharmacotherapy; prescribing; therapeutics

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29315721      PMCID: PMC5867102          DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13491

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0306-5251            Impact factor:   4.335


What is Already Known about this Subject

Prescribing errors can result in patient harm and high healthcare costs. Junior doctors write many prescriptions in hospitals but one in 10 of their prescriptions may contain errors, in part because of poor prescribing competencies. It is not clear whether medical students lack essential prescribing skills and competencies when they graduate.

What this Study Adds

There is a need for a greater consensus among clinical pharmacology and therapeutics teachers on the competencies that medical students should have in order to prescribe safely and effectively. Despite the lack of a consensus, there is considerable evidence that final‐year medical students have not attained sufficient competencies for safe and effective prescribing as medical doctors, especially regarding general and antimicrobial prescribing and pharmacovigilance. Changes in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics education during the undergraduate medical curriculum are urgently required, in order to improve the prescribing competencies of future doctors.

Introduction

Rational prescribing (i.e. effectively, safely and at low cost) is a challenging task for every medical doctor as it involves a mixture of knowledge, skills and attitudes integrated into the complex social context of the clinical workplace 1. Poor prescribing may result in prescribing errors and adverse drugs reactions, which could adversely affect patient outcomes, leading to hospitalization or even death 2, 3. There is considerable evidence that junior hospital doctors in the first 2 years of practice after graduation make relatively many prescribing errors (8–10% of prescriptions) and are more likely to make these errors than consultants 4, 5, 6. This is particularly worrying as junior doctors write a large proportion (68%) of hospital prescriptions 5. Studies have identified a range of factors underlying the poor prescribing skills of junior doctors, including individual (e.g. lack of experience), environmental (e.g. high workload), organizational (e.g. lack of standardization) and patient (e.g. polypharmacy) factors 4, 7, 8. A lack of prescribing competencies (i.e. knowledge, skills and attitudes) among junior doctors is frequently mentioned 7, 9, which might be due to inadequate undergraduate education and training in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT). Indeed, a recent study showed that European final‐year medical students lacked essential prescribing competencies and felt that their medical curriculum had not adequately prepared them for safe prescribing 10. Another recent study showed that CPT education across Europe is still mainly based on traditional learning methods (e.g. lectures and written examinations), which seem to be associated with a lower level of prescribing knowledge and skills among final‐year students than problem‐based learning methods (e.g. patient simulation and real‐life prescribing) 11. Although these findings are concerning, there is no comprehensive overview of the literature addressing the competencies that medical students should have acquired in order to prescribe safely and effectively as medical doctors, and whether these have been attained by the time they graduate. Previous literature reviews focused mainly on the prevalence and causes of prescribing errors made by junior doctors 12, 13. By shifting the focus to final‐year students rather than junior doctors, we aimed to identify possible shortcomings in undergraduate CPT education that could be improved in the future. To this end, we conducted a systematic search of the peer‐reviewed literature with the following two research questions: (i) which prescribing competencies should medical students have acquired in order to prescribe safely and effectively by the time they graduate?; and (ii) do final‐year medical students have sufficient prescribing competencies?

Methods

Data sources and literature search strategy

We performed a systematic search to identify descriptive or observational studies of the prescribing competencies of final‐year medical students. The review was conducted and performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines 14. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number CRD42017067063). With the assistance of a medical information specialist (R.O.), we searched the PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) databases systematically from the earliest dates up to 10 January 2017. PubMed was used as the standard medical research database, and the EMBASE and ERIC databases were used to detect articles published in more education‐orientated journals. For each database, the search terms used were variations of three key concepts: competence, prescribing and medical student. Full details of the search strategy in PubMed, EMBASE and ERIC are provided in Appendix S1. Duplicate articles were excluded and the remaining articles were screened for eligibility. Articles that were not available in digital form were retrieved from national university libraries or from the original author. The references of relevant articles were also screened using the forward and backward snowball method 15.

Study selection

First, two researchers (D.B. and S.G.) screened the titles and abstracts independently for eligibility. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with a third researcher (J.T.). Articles were included if they described prescribing competencies that medical graduates should have acquired or if they evaluated prescribing competencies of final‐year medical students. Prescribing competencies were defined as knowledge, skills or attitudes that are relevant to safe and effective prescribing. Final‐year medical students were defined as students who would graduate from medical school within 1 year or who had recently graduated but had not yet started working as a junior doctor (i.e. medical graduates). The following exclusion criteria were used: (i) outcome measure not related to prescribing competencies; (ii) intervention studies (e.g. evaluation of a specific educational intervention or teaching method); (iii) not including final‐year medical students (e.g. focusing only on lower‐grade medical students, junior doctors); (iv) non‐original research (i.e. reviews, editorials, letters to the editor, conference abstracts, symposium reports); (v) articles that only measure psychometric properties of assessments (e.g. validity, reliability); (vi) languages other than English, German or Dutch; and (vii) abstract not available. Reasons for exclusion were documented (Figure 1). In cases of doubt, the full‐text article was obtained and screened. Thereafter, the researchers screened the full‐text articles for eligibility, using the same inclusion and exclusion criteria as above, with the additional exclusion criterion of full‐text not available.
Figure 1

Flowchart of the systematic literature search

Flowchart of the systematic literature search

Data extraction and quality assessment

Data were extracted using the Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) Collaboration coding sheet (Appendix S2) 16. The BEME coding items used were administrative, context, stated aim of study and documented performance. The Kirkpatrick model of hierarchy of evaluation, modified by Freeth, was used to evaluate the outcome level (Table 2) 17, 18. The main CPT topics were identified and the methodological quality of articles evaluating prescribing competencies was assessed using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument (MERSQI) 19. It was not possible to use this instrument for articles describing competencies as almost all articles were based on expert opinion and did not provide quantitative data. The MERSQI instrument consists of six domains: study design, sampling, type of data, validation of evaluation instrument, data analysis and outcomes measured. The maximum score for each domain was 3, producing a maximum possible score of 18 and a potential range of 5–18. Although there is no defined cut‐off for high‐ or low‐quality study methods, a previous study used a MERSQI score of 14 or higher as a cut‐off for high quality 20. Two researchers (D.B. and S.G.) extracted data and assessed data quality independently, with a third author (J.T.) being involved, if necessary, to reach a consensus.

Data analysis

All descriptive analyses were performed in IBM SPSS version 22.0 (Chicago, IL). The total mean MERSQI score (accounting for ‘non‐applicable’ responses) was calculated. Moreover, the proportion of articles published in different years, on different continents and involving different health professions was calculated. Given the variety of study designs and outcomes studied, no quantitative analysis or additional analysis of risk for bias was performed.

Results

Search results

The initial search identified 3749 articles. The flowchart of the search, selection and review process is presented in Figure 1. Eleven articles could not be obtained from either the library or the corresponding authors, and were thus excluded. In total, 59 articles met the inclusion criteria; the 1276 references from these articles were snowball‐searched, which yielded 13 new articles. In total, 72 articles were included in the qualitative analysis, of which 25 described (Table 1) and 47 evaluated (Table 2) the competencies of final‐year medical students.
Table 1

Identified articles (n = 25) describing the prescribing competencies of final‐year medical students

Author Country Aim CPT topic Methods Main results
Antman et al. (2016) 71 USATo define core competencies for the prevention and management of prescription drug misuse for medical educationDrug misuseEvidence based on the opinion of a working group consisting of 4 deans and 2 leaders of medical societies in one country10 core competencies for the prevention and management of prescription drug misuse
Baker et al. (2011) 75 UKTo develop a core list of 100 commonly prescribed drugs to support prescribing educationGeneral prescribingEvidence‐based retrospective analysis of prescribing data from primary and secondary care and a cross‐sectional survey among 148 FY1 doctorsA core list of 100 commonly prescribed drugs that is useful for teaching prescribing
Banna et al. (1994) 100 United Arab EmiratesTo present a core curriculum for the teaching of pharmacology and therapeutics for medical studentsGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of 4 CPT teachers from one institution27 knowledge objectives and 21 skill objectives for pharmacology and therapeutics education
Borgeat et al. (1985) 72 CanadaTo describe specific learning objectives for the teaching therapeutic skills of a psychological nature to future physiciansPsychotherapyEvidence based on the opinion of psychiatry teachers from one institution3 cognitive, 14 aptitudinal, and 5 attitudinal objectives for teaching therapeutics skill of a psychological nature
Davenport et al. (2005) 67 UK; BSACTo define learning outcomes for prudent antimicrobial prescribing to undergraduate medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistanceEvidence based on the opinion of 2 working groups consisting of teachers from multiple institutions in one country12 learning objective domains for undergraduate education of prudent antibiotic prescribing
de Vries (1993) 63 The NetherlandsTo define a framework for the whole problem‐solving prescribing process and the learning objectives for medical education that can be derived from itGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of general practitioners and clinical pharmacologists from multiple institutions in one country8 cognitive skills, 2 motor skills and 6 communication skills for CPT education
Donnenberg et al. (2016) 66 USA; ACCPTo develop a comprehensive set of guidelines in clinical pharmacology for entering residencyGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of medical teachers from multiple institutions in one country8 topics for clinical pharmacology education
Flockhart et al. (2002) 65 USATo design and evaluate a core curriculum in CPT for final‐year medical studentsGeneral prescribingEvidence based on a literature survey and the opinion of CPT teachers from 2 institutions in one country13 learning objectives for a core curriculum in CPT
Gitanjali & Shashindran (2006) 101 India; IPSTo develop a draft curriculum for clinical pharmacology for medical undergraduatesGeneral prescribingEvidence based on a modified Delphi studya among pharmacologists of multiple institutions in one country13 knowledge, 3 psychomotor skills, 12 attitudes, and communication skills for clinical pharmacology education
Lum et al. (2013) 64 AustraliaTo develop a set of national competencies for teaching safe and effective prescribing during the medical curriculumGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of 3 teachers from 3 institutions in one country12 core competencies for safe and effective prescribing education
Mathur (2004) 102 IndiaTo describe a pharmacology curriculum for medical studentsGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of 1 pharmacologist from one institution8 learning objectives for teaching pharmacology
Maxwell & Walley (2003) 60 UKTo define national learning outcomes in CPT and to identify the minimum knowledge for medical graduates to prescribe safely and effectivelyGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of 2 CPT teachers from 2 institutions in one country48 core knowledge and understanding, 35 core skill, 19 core attitude learning outcomes for CPT education. 201 core drugs and 148 core diseases that students should know about
Midlöv et al. (2015) 53 SwedenTo identify the core competencies in basic and clinical pharmacology for medical studentsGeneral prescribingEvidence based on a modified three‐round Delphi study involving 25 physicians of multiple institutions in one country40 core competencies for basic and clinical pharmacology education
Murison et al. (2013) 69 USA; AAPMTo define learning outcomes for a new pain medicine curriculum for medical studentsPain medicineEvidence based on a literature survey among 15 pain physicians of multiple institutions in one country27 recommended topics for pain medicine
Nierenberg (1990) 58 USA; CMSECPTTo formulate an essential core curriculum for medical students in CPTGeneral prescribingEvidence based on a consensus among 40 faculty members and council representatives of multiple institutions in one country17 core knowledge, 16 core skill and 5 core attitude learning outcomes for CPT education
O'Brien et al. (2009) 73 USATo describe the development and implementation of a pharmacogenomics course for health professional studentsPharmacogenomicsEvidence based on the opinion of a group of medical and health science teachers from 2 institutions in one country7 molecular knowledge, 8 pharmacology knowledge and 7 technical skill learning outcomes for pharmacogenomics education
Orme et al. (2002) 74 EACPTTo develop a list of essential drugs and diseases for a core curriculum in CPTGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of a working group of 9 CPT teachers from nine different European countriesA list of 120 drugs that students must know about, 47 drugs that students must be aware of; 67 diseases that students must know how to treat; 158 diseases that students must be able to diagnose; 36 diseases that students should be aware of
Birkett et al. (2010) 61 IUPHARTo present a model core curriculum for CPT and prescribing for medical studentsGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of clinical pharmacologists from multiple countries63 core knowledge and understanding, 39 core skill, 19 core attitude learning outcomes for CPT and prescribing education
Pulcini & Gyssens (2013) 68 France and the NetherlandsTo review the education of prescribers of antibiotics, and analyse and discuss all relevant aspectsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistanceEvidence based on the opinion of 2 infectiologists from 2 countries34 learning objectives outcomes for prudent antibiotic prescribing, divided among 10 topics
Ross & Loke (2010) 55 UK; BPSTo create a consensus on the required competencies for new graduates in the area of prescribingGeneral prescribingEvidence based on a systematic review and modified two‐round Delphi study involving 21 experts in clinical pharmacology, pharmacy and medical education from multiple institutions in one country50 learning outcomes for prescribing education
Ross & Maxwell (2012) 62 UK; BPSTo provide a clear statement of the learning outcomes in clinical pharmacology and prescribing, and to describe a curriculum that might enable medical students to achieve these outcomesGeneral prescribingEvidence based on a previous Delphi study and opinion of 2 CPT teachers from 2 institutions in one country226 core knowledge and understanding and 58 core skill learning outcomes for teaching clinical pharmacology and prescribing. 98 drug classes and 125 therapeutic problems that students should be familiar with
Sice (1975) 57 USATo define the basic objectives for pharmacological education for preclinical students, clerks and residentsGeneral prescribingEvidence based on the opinion of 1 pharmacologist from 1 institution6 learning objectives for pharmacological education for preclinical medical students, 7 objectives for clerks and 5 objectives for residents
Taylor et al. (2016) 70 BarbadosTo create a summative document containing aims, objectives and methods that can be used for the training of healthcare professionals in ward‐based inpatient diabetes careDiabetes careEvidence based on the opinion of 55 final‐year medical students of 1 institution using a four‐stage approach13 aims, 29 learning objectives and 21 methods for the inpatient diabetes care
Turner & Weiner (2002) 56 USATo develop expert‐based guidelines for a medical curriculum on chronic pain evaluation and management in older adultsPain medicineEvidence based on a modified two‐round Delphi study involving 12 experts in pain management and medical education of multiple institutions in one country8 pain assessment knowledge, 7 pain management knowledge, 12 skills/abilities and 12 attitude items for chronic pain curriculum
Walley & Webb (1997) 54 UK; BPSTo develop a national core curriculum in CPT for medical educationGeneral prescribingEvidence based on a four‐round Delphi study involving 8 senior clinical pharmacologists from 2 countries16 core knowledge and understanding, 14 core skill and 4 core attitude learning outcomes for teaching CPT

AAPM, American Association of Physicists in Medicine; ACCP, American College of Clinical Pharmacy; BPS, British Pharmacological Society; BSAC, British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy; CMSECPT, Council for Medical Student Education in Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics; CPT, clinical pharmacology and therapeutics; EACPT, European Association of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics; FY1, foundation year 1; IPS, Indian Pharmacological Society; IUPHAR, International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology

No reference or description of the Delhi process was provided

Table 2

Articles (n = 47) evaluating the prescribing competencies of final‐year medical students

Author Setting Study design Participants CPT topic Methods Main results Kirkpatrick level c MERSQI‐score a
Abbo et al. (2013) 23 USA; 3 medical schoolsSingle‐group, cross‐sectional descriptive317 final‐year (4th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance24‐point self‐administered electronic survey instrument about perceptions, knowledge and attitudes to antimicrobial use and resistance, including 11 clinical vignettes92% agreed that knowledge of antimicrobials is important. Mean correct knowledge score was low (51%; max. 100%). Only one‐third perceived their preparedness to be adequate in some fundamental principles of antimicrobial use. 90% wanted more education on appropriate use of antimicrobials1, 2b12
Abubakar et al. (2015) 30 Malaysia: one medical schoolMultiple groups, cross‐sectional descriptive37 penultimate‐(4th) year and 50 final‐year (5th) medical studentsPharmacovigilance25‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding ADRs and pharmacovigilance78% agreed that ADR reporting is a professional obligation. 59% recognized the right functions of pharmacovigilance. Only 21% knew the method used to report ADRs; 47% had never received any training in how to report ADRs1, 2b11
Agrawal et al. (2013) 31 India; one universityMultiple groups, cross‐sectional descriptive102 2nd‐year and 98 final‐year (5th) medical and dental studentsContraception55‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes, and barriers to practice regarding oral contraceptive pillsAverage knowledge score was low (16.7; max. 30); final‐year students had higher knowledge scores compared with 2nd year students. Most students had negative perceptions and attitudes to oral conceptive pills2b8.5
Al‐Wadaani (2013) 87 Saudi Arabia; one medical schoolSingle‐group, cross‐sectional descriptive73 final‐year (6th) medical studentsCardiovascular22‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding diabetes and diabetic retinopathyOverall knowledge, attitude and practice scores were moderate (64.8; max. 100). Students lacked knowledge about the follow‐up of diabetic patients for the screening of diabetic retinopathy. 90% of students did not know the proper angle of insulin injection2b10.5
Awad et al. (2012) 32 Kuwait; one universityMultiple groups, cross‐sectional descriptive54 junior and 68 senior (4th–7th‐year) medical and pharmacy studentsComplementary and alternative medicinesSelf‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, perceived effectiveness and barriers to complementary and alternative medicineMedical students had poor knowledge of complementary and alternative medicine. Over two‐thirds had positive attitudes. Lack of trained professionals and lack of scientific evidence were the most common perceived barriers2b9
Azeem et al. (2010) 80 Pakistan; one university hospitalSingle‐group, cross‐sectional descriptive105 medical graduatesGeneral prescribingSelf‐administered written questionnaire about perceptions regarding preparation and competency to prescribe as junior doctors19% considered themselves competent to prescribe at the time of graduation. <35% felt comfortable in providing information about treatment options to patients. The majority (59–95%) indicated a lack of formal teaching and practice at skills relating to drug therapy1, 2a6.5
Beyhun et al. (2016) 85 Turkey; one medical schoolSingle‐group, cross‐sectional descriptive148 final‐year (6th) medical studentsNarcoticsSelf‐administered written questionnaire about awareness of synthetic cannabinoidsStudents’ mean awareness score was moderate (4.7; max. 9). Students lacked awareness of usage, illegal status and clinical effects of synthetic cannabinoids2b8.5
Brinkman et al. (2017) 10 Europe; 17 medical schools from 15 countriesSingle‐group, cross‐sectional descriptive895 final‐year (5th–6th) medical studentsGeneral prescribingOnline assessment of prescribing knowledge (24 MCQs) and skills (5 patient cases). Self‐administered questionnaire about self‐reported confidence, perceived preparedness for prescribing, and received CPT educationOverall knowledge score was moderate (70%, max. 100%). 46% of the therapies were inappropriate and 55% of the prescriptions contained an error. Students lacked confidence in essential prescribing skills and felt not adequately prepared for prescribing responsibilities. >60% were not satisfied with the quantity and quality of undergraduate CPT education1, 2b13.5
Brinkman et al. (2014) 27 The Netherlands; one medical schoolSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive483 final‐year (6th) medical studentsGeneral prescribingPrescribing performance during 4 therapeutic consultations with real patients during clinical clerkship, self‐administered online questionnaire on self‐reported confidence in prescribingAdequate performance score (7.93; max. 10). Majority (66–88%) lacked self‐reported confidence in essential prescribing skills2a, 39
Cheng & Yu (2012) 33 China; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive103 penultimate‐year (6th) and 80 final‐year (7th) medical students, 59 clinical master degree candidates, 50 clinical doctorsNarcotics45‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge of cancer pain managementSenior medical students had a poor knowledge of cancer pain management, especially among non‐oncological medical students2b11.5
Chuenchom et al. (2016) 76 Thailand; three medical schoolsSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive455 final‐year (6th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistanceSelf‐administered written questionnaire about perception, attitude and knowledge of antimicrobial resistance, appropriate antimicrobial use and infection controlMean knowledge scores were low (1.61; max. 5). Nearly all participants had a positive attitude about antimicrobial resistance. >10% reported that they had never learned about antimicrobial resistance and appropriate antibiotic use. Nearly all students wanted more education about rational antimicrobial use1, 2b10
Coombes et al. (2008) 81 Australia; two teaching hospitalsSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive101 final‐year (4th) medical studentsGeneral prescribing21‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about students' perceptions of their readiness to prescribe, associated risks and outcome if involved in an error, as well as their perceptions of available support84% felt able to prescribe for simple complaints, whereas only 54% felt comfortable to prescribe warfarin and 66%to prescribe IV fluids. 99% were under the misapprehension that potentially harmful prescriptions would be safely administered. 79% perceived that they would be blamed if they made a prescribing error2a8.5
Dyar et al. (2013) 35 France; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive34 penultimate‐year (5th) and 26 final‐year (6th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance41‐point self‐administered online questionnaire about knowledge, perceptions and beliefs about antibiotic resistance and prescribingFinal‐year students were highly aware of and concerned about the overuse of antibiotics. Areas of non‐confidence and gaps in knowledge were found. Students consistently overestimated the current burden of resistant bacteria and were unaware of success in reducing MRSA infections. 79% wanted more training in antibiotic selection1, 2b9.5
Dyar et al. (2014) 77 Europe; seven medical schools from seven countriesSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive338 final‐year (5th–6th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance41‐point self‐administered online questionnaire about knowledge, perceptions and beliefs about antibiotic resistance and prescribingStudents lacked confidence in combination therapy and dose selection of antibiotics. Students consistently overestimated the current burden of resistant bacteria and were unaware of success in reducing MRSA infections. 74% wanted more training in antibiotic selection1, 2b10.5
Dyasanoor & Urooge (2016) 28 India; one university hospitalMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive52 undergraduates, 221 internsa, 227 postgraduatesGeneral prescribingQuality of 500 prescriptions dispensed by participants analysed according to 19 parameters39% of the prescriptions by interns were not adequate because important parameters were missing. Prescriptions written by undergraduates were better than those written by interns and postgraduates310
Grossman & Sheidler (1985) 25 USA; one university hospitalMultiple groups; pretest intervention4 2nd‐year, 12 penultimate‐year (3rd), 1 final‐year (4th) medical student, 68 house officersNarcotics3 clinical vignettes about converting narcotic analgesic regimen in patients with pain2% of the answers of medical students were within the correct range. There were no significant differences between the responses among individuals at different education levels2b10
Gyawali et al. (2016) 46 Nepal; one university hospitalMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive120 final‐year (5th) medical students, 117 internsa Generic prescribing and substitutionSelf‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge and perceptions of generic medicine and generic prescribingOnly 5% knew the correct regulatory limits for bioequivalence. 46% had the impression that brand‐name medicines were required to meet higher safety standards than were generic medicines. 17% had the impression that generic medicines caused more side effects and were less effective than brand‐name medicines2b12.5
Haque et al. (2016) 36 Malaysia; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive41 3rd‐year, 55 penultimate‐year (4th) and 45 final‐year (5th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance21‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, beliefs and practices regarding antibiotic resistance and prescribing>50% of final‐year students lacked confidence in combination therapy and dose and duration selection of antibiotics. Students consistently overestimated the current burden of resistant bacteria. 88% wanted more training in rational antibiotic selection1, 2b12.5
Harakeh et al. (2015) 37 Saudi Arabia; two medical schoolsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive1042 1st‐year to final‐year (6th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance20‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding the use of antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections93% of the final‐year medical students had adequate knowledge of antibiotic effectiveness. Similarly, most were aware of antibiotic abuse and development of drug resistance in bacteria2b9.5
Hassali et al. (2007) 51 Australia; 10 universitiesMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive400 final‐year (5th) medical students and 289 final‐year (5th) pharmacy pre‐registrantsGeneric prescribing and substitution20‐point self‐administered online questionnaire about knowledge and perceptions of generic medicine, generic prescribing and generic substitutionBoth groups scored poorly on the allowable bioequivalence limits, with pharmacy pre‐registrants scoring better. Both groups incorrectly believed that generic medicines met lower safety standards, were inferior in quality, less effective and produced more side effects than brand‐name medicines2b11.5
Heaton et al. (2008) 82 UK; 25 medical schoolsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive2413 medical students graduating in 2006–2008General prescribing17‐point self‐administered online questionnaire about undergraduate training and assessment in pharmacology and therapeutics, the acquisition of prescribing skills and self‐reported confidence in prescribingOnly 38% felt confident about prescription writing and 35% had filled in a hospital prescription chart more than three times during training. 74% felt that there was (far) too little teaching and 56% disagreed that their assessment thoroughly tested knowledge and skills1, 2a10
Hema et al. (2012) 47 India; one university hospitalMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive80 final‐year (5th) medical students, 88 internsb and 132 postgraduatesPharmacovigilance25‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about awareness, knowledge and methods to apply pharmacovigilanceCompared with interns and postgraduates, final‐year students had a lower awareness score (2.5; max. 5), lower knowledge score (2.3; max. 8) and lower method of application score (5.8; max. 12)2b10
Holstein et al. (2000) 38 Germany; 21 academic teaching and university hospitalsSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive310 final‐year (6th) medical studentsCardiovascular20‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about clinically relevant diabetes treatment knowledge and experienceMarked gaps in manual experience and clinically relevant knowledge of diabetes, particularly in practical aspects of diabetes therapy. 45% had never injected insulin and 68% had no experience with the insulin pen. 81% were not satisfied with the diabetes teaching1, 2b10.5
Hoque et al. (2016) 39 Bangladesh; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive40 3rdyear, 33 penultimate‐year (4th) and 34 final‐year (5th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance21‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and perceptions about antimicrobial resistance and rational use of antimicrobialsParticipants had an average level of confidence in the rational use of antimicrobials, with final‐year students being more confident than earlier‐year students. Students underestimated the prevalence rate of MRSA infection. 94% wanted more training in antibiotic selection1, 2b11.5
Huang et al. (2013) 40 China; three teaching hospitalsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive1236 medical students, including 241 final‐year (5th year) students, 852 nonmedical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance30‐point self‐administered online questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and perceptions about antibiotic useSenior students had more knowledge of and positive attitudes to antibiotic use compared with junior students. No difference between penultimate‐year (4th) and final‐year (5th) students was observed. There was more excessive use of antibiotics among senior medical students2b12.5
Humphreys et al. (2006) 78 Ireland; three medical schoolsSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive108 medical graduatesAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance19‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge and understanding of treatment and prevention of common infections±60% of the questions were answered correctly; questions regarding the rational use of antibiotics were poorly answered compared with other questions2b9
Ibia et al. (2005) 24 USA; 21 medical schoolsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive30 penultimate‐year (3th) and 959 final‐year (4th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistanceSix paediatric vignettes regarding clinical management of different upper respiratory tract infections99% were informed about the problems of antibiotic resistance. Majority of students 30–56%) prescribed antibiotics inappropriately for viral upper respiratory diseases. No subanalysis for done for study year2b11.5
Iffat et al. (2014) 41 Pakistan; multiple universitiesMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive78 3rd‐year, 212 penultimate‐year (4th) and 241 final‐year (5th) dental and medical studentsPharmacovigilance31‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and perceptions about ADR reporting88% had knowledge of ADRs. Medical students showed generally positive attitudes to ADR reporting. 55% did not know the definition of pharmacovigilance. Only 10% knew where to report ADRs. 72% indicated that they had not received any training in reporting ADRs2b12.5
Ismail et al. (2015) 83 Malaysia; one medical schoolSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive23 final‐year (5th) medical studentsPharmacovigilanceSelf‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and practice regarding ADRs and pharmacovigilance96% knew the term ADRs. 57% did not know the method for reporting ADRs, although 78% had observed ADRs during clinical clerkships. 87% had not received any training in ADR reporting during their medical training1, 2b10
Jamshed et al. (2014) 52 Malaysia; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive72 final‐year (5th) medical students and 51 final‐year (5th) pharmacy studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistanceSelf‐administered written questionnaire about understanding of antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance94% showed adequate knowledge regarding the course content related to antibiotics. Only 30% were able to recognize penicillin and vancomycin‐resistant bacteria. Pharmacy students had better knowledge than medical students2b11
Kaki (2011) 86 Saudi Arabia; one medical schoolSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive325 final‐year (6th) medical studentsNarcotics18‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, beliefs and attitudes to cancer pain management46% considered cancer pain as untreatable. 59% considered that the risk of addiction is high with opioid prescriptions. 68% limited opioid prescriptions to patients with poor prognosis. 63% indicated that they had received no education in pain medicine during their medical training1, 2b12
Khan et al. (2013) 42 India; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive148 3rd‐year medical students and 130 medical graduatesGeneral prescribingSelf‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and behaviour regarding safe prescribing, including one patient caseThe knowledge and attitudes of medical graduates were satisfactory. 12% prescribed unnecessary antibiotics. Prescribing skills were generally inadequate as errors in written prescriptions were commonly found2b10.5
Meher et al. (2015) 43 India; one medical schoolSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive60 2nd‐year, 60 penultimate‐year (4th), 60 final‐year (5th) medical studentsPharmacovigilance21‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and practice of pharmacovigilanceMean knowledge and attitude scores for final‐year students were low (4.3; max. 7 and 1.7; max. 4, respectively). Penultimate‐year students had better knowledge and attitude scores than final and 2nd‐year students2b9.5
Olakunle et al. (2014) 79 Nigeria; three medical schoolsSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive241 final‐year (6th) medical studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistanceSelf‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge of diagnosis and management of tuberculosis under DOTSOnly 46% correctly mentioned the various categories of the DOTS treatment regimen. 7% were able to identify the correct treatment duration for new tuberculosis2b10.5
Oshikoya et al. (2008) 21 Nigeria; one medical schoolSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive34 final‐year (6th) medical studentsGeneral prescribingSelf‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge of principles of good prescribing and prescribing skills, including two clinical cases92% knew that rational prescribing involved prescribing correct dosage of an appropriate medicine formulation. Less than 50% of the prescriptions included name, case file number, age and gender of the patient2b10.5
Ozoh et al. (2014) 89 Nigeria; one medical schoolSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive139 final‐year (6th) medical studentsCOPDSelf‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge of COPD diagnosis and treatment38% had good, 37% fair and 20% poor knowledge of COPD management. 55% were familiar with the GOLD guidelines. 28% correctly identified inhaled steroids and bronchodilators as therapy for stable COPD2b9.5
Puchner & Zacharisen (2002) 48 USA; two academic and two teaching hospitalsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive36 medical students (junior/senior), 342 medical specialistsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistanceSelf‐administered written questionnaire about cephalosporin prescribing and knowledge of penicillin allergyThere was marked variation between study groups in the prescribing of cephalosporin and requesting penicillin skin testing. In general, medical specialists had a better knowledge of penicillin allergy than medical students2b8.5
Rehman et al. (2011) 88 USA; one medical school and four teaching hospitalsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive121 final‐year (4th) year medical students, 354 junior doctorsCardiovascular11‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge of hypertension diagnosis and managementOnly 8% answered the questions regarding hypertension treatment correctly. Mean number of correct answers given by final‐year students was low (5.2; max. 11), although they did better than junior doctors2b12.5
Rothwell et al. (2012) 29 UK; three medical schoolsSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive65 medical graduatesGeneral prescribingMultiple methods, including face‐to‐face and telephone interviews, questionnaires and secondary data from prescribing safety assessment73–80% of the graduates felt generally underprepared for prescribing. Only 16–19% of the graduates passed the prescribing safety assessment at the first attempt2b11
Scaioli et al. (2015) 44 Italy; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive465 1st year, 187 2nd‐year, 190 3rd‐year, 70 4th‐year, 79 penultimate‐year (5th), 59 final‐year (6th) healthcare studentsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance31‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge and attitude about antibiotic usage and antibiotic resistanceMore than 90% answered all items correctly. However, 20% were not aware that antimicrobial drugs were not effective against viruses and that these drugs can cause secondary infections. However, no subanalysis by study year was performed2b11.5
Schutte et al. (2017) 45 The Netherlands; eight medical schoolsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive354 3rd‐year, 92 4th‐year, 106 penultimate‐year (5th), 298 final‐year (6th) medical studentsPharmacovigilance10‐point self‐administered online questionnaire about pharmacovigilance awareness, skills and knowledgeFinal‐year students had marginally better knowledge scores than 3rd‐year students (68% vs. 64%). Only 48% of the final‐year students felt sufficiently prepared to report ADRs in future practice, and a substantial proportion did not know the authority to which they should report ADRs1, 2b12.5
Sharrad & Hassali (2011) 84 Iraq; six medical schoolsSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive546 final‐year (6th) medical studentsGeneric prescribing and substitution23‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about perception and knowledge of generic medicines and generic prescribing>70% of the respondents did not possess sufficient knowledge about bioequivalence limits for generic medicines. >60% of the students thought that generic medicines were inferior, less effective and produced more side effects than brand‐name medicines2b13
Thriemer et al. (2013) 49 Democratic Republic of Congo; one medical school and multiple hospitalsMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive106 final‐year (6th) medical students and 78 medical doctorsAntimicrobial prescribing and resistance23‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding antibiotic prescribingMean knowledge scores were generally low (4.9; max. 9) and did not differ significantly between the groups. Students had high self‐confidence in antibiotic prescribing (86%), although this was lower than that of qualified doctors (95%)2b12.5
Upadhyaya et al. (2012) 22 India; one teaching hospitalSingle‐group; cross‐sectional descriptive50 medical graduatesGeneral prescribing22‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about self‐rated knowledge of the principles of good prescribing48% rated their prescribing knowledge as average, and 18% as (very) poor. 58% felt that their medical training did not prepare them for rational prescribing. 42% felt that they had some problems with writing a prescription during their internship1, 2a7
Weber et al. (1986) 50 Canada; one paediatric hospitalMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive28 final‐year (4th) medical students, 21 paediatric residents, 22 paediatriciansGeneral prescribingSix paediatric patient cases about knowledge of the price of frequently prescribed medicationsStudents' estimations were adequate in 40% of the cases, which was lower than that of paediatric residents (52%) and paediatricians (62%)2b8
Weinstein et al. (2000) 34 USA; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive88 1st‐year medical students, 180 final‐year (4th) medical studentsNarcotics49‐point self‐administered written questionnaire about knowledge and attitudes on pain and the use of opioid analgesicsSenior medical students scored as well as, or better than, 1st‐year students on questions related to knowledge about pain. However, they had a more negative attitude to relieving chronic pain and seemed to have less understanding about the causes of pain in cancer patients2b10.5
Wheeler et al. (2004) 26 UK; one medical schoolMultiple groups; cross‐sectional descriptive87 2nd‐year, 98 penultimate‐year (3rd), 78 final‐year (4th) medical studentsGeneral prescribingOnline multiple‐choice examination about dose‐calculating skillsThe mean knowledge score for all students was low (1.2; max. 3), although final‐year students had significantly better knowledge scores than 1st‐year students2b9.5

ADR, adverse drug reactions; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CPT, clinical pharmacology and therapeutics; DOTS, directly observed treatment, short‐course; GOLD, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease; IV, intravenous; MCQ, multiple choice question; MERSQI, Medical Education Research Quality Instrument; MRSA, methicillin‐resistant

The MERSQI has a minimum score of 5 and a maximum score of 18.

Interns in India and Malaysia have graduated from medical school but receive their full registration as a medical doctor after completion of the internship

Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation are:

Level 1: Participation – covers learners' views on the learning experience, its organization, presentation, content, teaching methods and aspects of the instructional organization, materials and quality of instruction.

Level 2a: Modification of attitudes or perceptions – outcomes here relate to changes in the reciprocal attitudes or perceptions between participant groups towards intervention or simulation.

Level 2b: Modification of knowledge and skills – for knowledge, this relates to the acquisition of concepts, procedures and principles; for skills, this relates to the acquisition of thinking and problem solving, and psychomotor and social skills.

Level 3: Behavioural change – this documents the transfer of learning to the workplace or the willingness of learners to apply new knowledge and skills.

Level 4a: Change in organizational practice – this relates to wider changes in the organization or delivery of care, attributable to an educational programme.

Level 4b: Benefits to patients or clients – this relates to any improvement in the health or well‐being of patients and clients as a direct result of an educational programme.

Identified articles (n = 25) describing the prescribing competencies of final‐year medical students AAPM, American Association of Physicists in Medicine; ACCP, American College of Clinical Pharmacy; BPS, British Pharmacological Society; BSAC, British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy; CMSECPT, Council for Medical Student Education in Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics; CPT, clinical pharmacology and therapeutics; EACPT, European Association of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics; FY1, foundation year 1; IPS, Indian Pharmacological Society; IUPHAR, International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology No reference or description of the Delhi process was provided Articles (n = 47) evaluating the prescribing competencies of final‐year medical students ADR, adverse drug reactions; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CPT, clinical pharmacology and therapeutics; DOTS, directly observed treatment, short‐course; GOLD, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease; IV, intravenous; MCQ, multiple choice question; MERSQI, Medical Education Research Quality Instrument; MRSA, methicillin‐resistant The MERSQI has a minimum score of 5 and a maximum score of 18. Interns in India and Malaysia have graduated from medical school but receive their full registration as a medical doctor after completion of the internship Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation are: Level 1: Participation – covers learners' views on the learning experience, its organization, presentation, content, teaching methods and aspects of the instructional organization, materials and quality of instruction. Level 2a: Modification of attitudes or perceptions – outcomes here relate to changes in the reciprocal attitudes or perceptions between participant groups towards intervention or simulation. Level 2b: Modification of knowledge and skills – for knowledge, this relates to the acquisition of concepts, procedures and principles; for skills, this relates to the acquisition of thinking and problem solving, and psychomotor and social skills. Level 3: Behavioural change – this documents the transfer of learning to the workplace or the willingness of learners to apply new knowledge and skills. Level 4a: Change in organizational practice – this relates to wider changes in the organization or delivery of care, attributable to an educational programme. Level 4b: Benefits to patients or clients – this relates to any improvement in the health or well‐being of patients and clients as a direct result of an educational programme.

Study characteristics

The number of articles evaluating prescribing competencies was found to have increased in the past two decades, from two articles in 2000 to eight in 2016; a similar trend was not seen for articles describing competencies (Figure 2). Of the 25 articles describing competencies, 12 came from Europe, 10 from North America, two from Asia and one from Australia. In terms of CPT topics, most articles (72%) described competencies in general prescribing. The vast majority of articles (96%) were based on expert opinion; only one used a cross‐sectional design.
Figure 2

Identified articles describing prescribing competencies () and evaluating prescribing competencies () per year. Articles published before 2000 (n = 8) were not included

Identified articles describing prescribing competencies () and evaluating prescribing competencies () per year. Articles published before 2000 (n = 8) were not included Of the 47 articles evaluating competencies, 22 were from Asia, 12 from Europe, seven from North America, four from Africa and two from Australia. In terms of CPT topics, most articles (32%) evaluated competencies in antimicrobial prescribing and resistance, and in general prescribing (26%). Most studies (85%) used a cross‐sectional survey as the primary evaluation method; other evaluation methods comprised clinical cases (n = 3) 10, 21, 22, clinical vignettes (n = 3) 23, 24, 25, multiple‐choice exams (n = 2) 10, 26, therapeutic consultations with patients in general practice (n = 1) 27, drug prescriptions during internship (n = 1) 28 and a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methods (n = 1) 29. In total, 10 339 final‐year medical students were involved. The median number of students per study was 104 (range 1–2413). Besides final‐year medical students, some studies also involved 1–5th year students (n = 20) 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, junior doctors and residents (n = 8) 25, 28, 33, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, medical specialists (n = 2) 48, 50, pharmacy students (n = 3) 32, 51, 52, dental students (n = 2) 31, 41 and nonhealthcare students (n = 1) 40.

Study quality

Of the 25 articles describing competencies, four articles (16%) were based on the opinion of experts from one institution, 16 (64%) on the opinion of experts from multiple institutions within one country (four used the Delphi method) and four (16%) on the opinion of experts from multiple countries (one used the Delphi method). Only four Delphi studies described how a consensus among experts was achieved 53, 54, 55, 56. Of the 47 articles evaluating competencies, 27 (57%) had a single‐institution design, 45 (96%) reported objectively measured outcomes, and 21 (45%) had a response rate <50% or did not report it. Thirty‐two articles (68%) did not discuss the validity and reliability of the evaluation method used. Almost all articles (92%) used appropriate data analysis; however, only 30 (64%) used analytical methods other than descriptive analysis. The total MERSQI scores for the articles ranged from 6.5 to 13.5, with a mean (standard deviation) of 10.5 (1.6). Four (9%) articles measured students' perceptions or attitudes as the primary outcome (Kirkpatrick levels 1 and 2a), 41 (87%) measured students' knowledge or skills (Kirkpatrick level 2b), and two (4%) measured students' behaviour (Kirkpatrick level 3).

Which prescribing competencies should medical students have acquired by the time they graduate?

Regarding general prescribing, Sice was the first to define 13 competencies for undergraduate pharmacological education based on his own experience 57. In 1990, Nierenberg developed a more detailed list of 17 knowledge, 16 skills, and five attitude items relevant for general prescribing, based on a consensus among CPT teachers in the USA 58. Walley and Webb developed an almost identical list of 16 knowledge, 14 skills and four attitude items based on a Delphi study among clinical pharmacologists in the UK and Ireland 59. This Delphi study served as a basis for the 2003 British Pharmacological Society (BPS) core curriculum described by Maxwell and Walley 60, which includes 48 knowledge, 35 skills and 19 attitude items and which was largely taken over in an international paper by Birkett et al. 61. In 2012, Ross and Maxwell updated the BPS curriculum to 226 knowledge and 58 skills items 62, based on another Delphi study among CPT teachers in the UK 55. De Vries 63 and Lum et al. 64 described specific competencies related to the process of rational prescribing. Flockhart et al. 65 and Donnenberg et al. 66 used the principles formulated by Nierenberg to develop learning outcomes for a core CPT curriculum in the USA. More recently, Midlöv et al. defined 40 prescribing competencies based on a Delphi study among physicians in Sweden 53. Competencies mentioned in more than one study are listed in Appendix S3. Besides general prescribing, Davenport et al. defined 12 competencies for prudent antimicrobial prescribing, based on a consensus between two UK working groups 67. This study served as a basis for the 34 learning outcomes for antimicrobial stewardship defined by Pulcini and Gyssens 68. Turner and Weiner used a Delphi study among pain specialists to develop 39 competencies for a chronic pain curriculum 56. Murinson et al. defined 27 learning objectives for general pain medicine, based on a survey among pain specialists 69. Other areas for which specific prescribing competencies have been described are diabetes care (n = 1) 70, drug misuse (n = 1) 71, psychotherapy (n = 1) 72 and pharmacogenomics (n = 1) 73.

Core drug lists

In 2002, Orme et al. was the first to describe a list of 120 ‘core drugs’ that students should know in detail, and 47 drugs that students should be familiar with but not required to know in any detail 74. Additionally, they provided a list of 67 ‘core diseases’ that students should know how to treat, 158 diseases that students should be able to diagnose and 36 diseases of which students should be aware. One year later, Maxwell and Walley described a more extensive list of 201 core drugs about which students should have an understanding of the mechanism of action, appropriate indications, appropriate routes of administration, and important contraindications and side effects 60. In addition, they reported 148 core diseases for which these drugs should be used. This list was further refined by Ross and Maxwell into 98 drug classes and 125 therapeutic problems that students should be familiar with 62. More recently, Baker et al. developed a validated list of 100 commonly prescribed drugs for use when teaching prescribing, based on a retrospective analysis of prescribing data from primary and secondary care combined with a survey among 148 foundation year 1 doctors 75.

Do final‐year medical students have sufficient prescribing competencies?

Fifteen articles evaluated students' attitudes to, and knowledge of, appropriate antimicrobial prescribing and resistance 23, 24, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 44, 48, 49, 52, 76, 77, 78, 79. Students generally had positive attitudes and perceptions about antimicrobial overuse and resistance 35, 49, 76, 77. However, they had poor knowledge of the local prevalence of resistant bacteria 35, 49, 77, 79 and of the treatment and prevention of common infections 24, 49, 78, 79. Additionally, they lacked self‐reported confidence in choosing the correct antibiotic, deciding when to use combination therapy, and choosing the correct dose and interval of administration 35, 36, 77. Only four studies reported a moderate‐to‐high level of knowledge about appropriate antimicrobial use among students 37, 40, 44, 52, and two described a moderate‐to‐high level of self‐reported confidence 39, 49. Most students (74–98%) wanted more training in rational antibiotic selection during medical training 23, 35, 36, 39, 76, 77. Eleven studies examined students' competencies regarding general prescribing 10, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 42, 50, 80, 81, 82. Six studies, including a large study of 2413 UK students and graduates, reported that students felt that there was a lack of learning opportunities related to rational prescribing during their medical training, and that they felt underprepared for their prescribing responsibilities 10, 22, 29, 80, 81, 82. Two studies, including a large multicentre study involving 895 European students, showed that students lacked essential prescribing knowledge and skills for common therapeutic problems 10, 21. One study reported that students' knowledge and attitudes were satisfactory, although their prescribing skills for written patient cases were poor 42. Other studies reported that prescribing skills, such as estimating drug costs 50 and drug calculation skills 26, were deficient. Only two studies investigated students' behaviour in clinical practice. Dyasanoor and Urooge reported that many drug prescriptions written by students during their last internship were erroneous because information about important entries was missing 28. Conversely, Brinkman et al. showed that students were sufficiently skilled in conducting therapeutic consultations with real patients during the final internship of a context‐learning CPT curriculum 27. Six studies showed that students had a positive attitude to pharmacovigilance but lacked knowledge about where and how to report adverse drug reactions 30, 41, 43, 45, 47, 83. Although many students (27–80%) had encountered an adverse drug reaction during clinical clerkships, very few (1–18%) had reported one 30, 43. Three studies reported that students (72–94%) received no or little training in reporting adverse drug reactions during medical training 30, 41, 83. Three studies showed that students generally had poor knowledge of, and negative perceptions about, prescribing generic medicines 46, 51, 84. They were generally under the misapprehension that generic medicines were inferior in quality, less effective and produced more side effects than brand‐name medicines 46, 51, 84. They generally lacked knowledge of synthetic cannabinoids 85, cancer pain management 33, 86 and conversion of narcotic analgesic regimens 25, although the latter study included only one final‐year student. Moreover, senior students were more negative about relieving chronic pain and seemed to have less understanding than first‐year students of the causes of pain in cancer patients 34. Three studies investigated students' knowledge of the treatment of cardiovascular diseases 38, 87, 88. Two studies reported deficiencies in students' knowledge of diabetes mellitus therapy – specifically, diabetic retinopathy and insulin treatment 38, 87. Rehman et al. found that students lacked knowledge of the first‐line treatment of uncomplicated arterial hypertension 88. Awad et al. investigated students' knowledge of, and attitude to, alternative and complementary medicines 32. Although students were positive about complementary and alternative therapies, their self‐reported knowledge was poor. Agrawal et al. reported that while students had good‐to‐excellent knowledge of oral contraceptive pills, they lacked a positive attitude in practice 31. Ozoh et al. found that students' general knowledge of chronic pulmonary obstructive disease treatment was modest, and that they were not familiar with international guidelines on optimal treatment 89.

Discussion

This was the first systematic review to investigate which prescribing competencies are required for safe and effective prescribing, and whether these have been attained by medical students by the time they graduate. We identified 25 studies that described a variety of prescribing competencies covering several CPT topics. The vast majority of these studies (72%) reported competencies regarding general prescribing and were based primarily on the early work of Nierenberg 58 and Walley and Webb 54. Although there seems to be some agreement about specific competencies (e.g. taking drug history, writing prescriptions; Appendix S3), we found no clear consensus among CPT teachers on which prescribing competencies are required before medical students/graduates are allowed to prescribe. A clear definition of competencies is important to steer curricular content – specifically, assessment – and students' approach to learning 90. A lack of agreement on the required competencies of students has also been identified in other areas of medical education – for example, global health 91 and nutritional medicine 92. It was not within the scope of the present review to determine why there is a lack of a consensus. One possibility is that most studies (64%) were focused on the local setting in a specific country – mainly the UK and USA. Authors might have chosen this local approach owing to structural differences in medical education between countries. Another possibility is that competencies were rarely the main focus of the retrieved articles, and thus provided little information on which to draw conclusions. Although studies were mainly based on expert opinion, few described how a consensus between experts was achieved. Additionally, most studies did not describe competencies in detail, which makes it difficult to implement relevant changes in the undergraduate CPT programme. Taken together, there is a need for a greater consensus among CPT teachers on detailed requirements for safe prescribing, to ensure that students are exposed to similar basic levels of training. This is becoming more important, given the increased cross‐border mobility of medical students and junior doctors 93. Notwithstanding the lack of a consensus on essential competencies, we identified 47 articles reporting a general lack of students' preparedness, self‐confidence, (self‐reported) knowledge and skills, specifically regarding general prescribing, antimicrobial prescribing and pharmacovigilance. These findings are in line with previous literature reviews reporting that medical graduates feel particularly unprepared for prescribing relative to their preparedness for other clinical competencies (e.g. history taking and physical examination) 94, 95. This lack of competence could at least partly explain the relatively high number of prescribing errors made by junior doctors, and is probably due to inadequate CPT education during the undergraduate medical curriculum. Indeed, recent studies have reported that CPT education is still based mainly on traditional learning methods (e.g. lectures and oral exams) 11, and is often not taught and assessed separately because the subject is integrated into broader course designs 62. What can be done? To improve CPT education in undergraduate European medical curricula, we recently formulated a list of recommendations that could also be useful elsewhere (e.g. the USA) 11. More emphasis should be given to training medical students in clinical practice, preferably as early as possible during medical training, with students being responsible for patient care under the supervision of a senior clinician 96. Moreover, prudent antibiotic prescribing and pharmacovigilance should be given more attention as many studies reported that students felt that there was a lack of training in these two subjects. However, as prescribing errors are caused by multiple factors, changing undergraduate CPT education is only part of the solution, and multifaceted interventions in clinical practice are needed that address the different aspects of the prescribing process 97. Although our findings are worrying, the results should be interpreted with caution, given the heterogeneity and methodological weaknesses of the included studies. Studies were generally of a single‐institution design and of low‐to‐moderate quality (mean MERSQI score 10.5), and different evaluation methods were used without their validity and reliability being reported. Moreover, as the vast majority of studies (96%) measured ‘soft endpoints’ (Kirkpatrick levels 1 and 2) in a controlled setting, it can be questioned whether the same results would be found in clinical practice. It is unlikely that competence in this context would be better, given the high workload, stress and distractions on hospital wards. Taken together, we conclude that there is considerable evidence that final‐year medical students lack the prescribing competencies required for safe prescribing. Our review had a number of limitations. First, articles may have been missed, although we attempted to minimize the likelihood of this by searching three databases and using a snowball strategy. Second, one recent important study was not included because the search was terminated before its publication. The latter study describes the delivery of a national prescribing assessment to 7343 UK final‐year medical students in 2016 98. Although there was significant variation in performance between final‐year medical students studying in different UK medical schools, their overall performance was good (95% passed the test). The study shows that the introduction of a valid and reliable national prescribing assessment is a powerful tool to emphasize CPT in the medical curriculum, and to evaluate and improve the essential prescribing competencies of future doctors. More countries should consider implementing a similar national prescribing assessment. Third, the cross‐sectional studies were small and had low response rates. Fourth, a number of potentially relevant studies were excluded because they did not mention students’ year of training. Fifth, the prescribing competencies of students might have been underestimated as a result of publication bias that favoured negative outcomes.

Conclusion

Taking these limitations into consideration, there is considerable evidence that final‐year medical students have insufficient prescribing competencies, which suggests that changes in undergraduate CPT education are required urgently. Moreover, there is a need for a greater consensus among CPT teachers on the competencies that are essential to ensure that medical students prescribe safely and effectively. Steps are being taken to build a European consensus among CPT experts. The Education Working Group of the European Association of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics is conducting a new Delphi study to achieve a consensus on learning outcomes that should be common to all European undergraduate CPT curricula. Future studies should investigate valid and reliable methods for assessing students' prescribing competencies in clinical practice, especially as current studies lack quality and mainly evaluate competencies in a controlled environment. To develop evidence‐based CPT education, further studies of educational interventions with Kirkpatrick's highest level of outcome are needed, preferably with a multicentre design, a large number of participants and a long follow‐up. Student‐run clinics may be useful for this purpose as they offer students early prescribing experience, with real responsibility for patient care under the supervision of a senior clinician 99.

Competing Interests

There are no competing interests to declare. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article. This study was carried out as part of our routine work. No funds were received. All authors declare that this work has not been, and will not be, published, in whole or part, in any other journal, and agree to the contents of the manuscript in its submitted form. Appendix S1 Search strategy performed in PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) databases on 10 January 2017 Click here for additional data file. Appendix S2 Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) Collaboration coding sheet Click here for additional data file. Appendix S3 General prescribing competencies mentioned by more than one study Click here for additional data file.
  85 in total

Review 1.  A core curriculum for medical students in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. The Council for Medical Student Education in Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.

Authors:  D W Nierenberg
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  Clinical pharmacology in research, teaching and health care: Considerations by IUPHAR, the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology.

Authors:  Donald Birkett; Kim Brøsen; Ingolf Cascorbi; Lars L Gustafsson; Simon Maxwell; Lembit Rago; Michael Rawlins; Marcus Reidenberg; Folke Sjöqvist; Tony Smith; Petra Thuerman; Andrew Walubo; Michael Orme; Folke Sjöqvist
Journal:  Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.080

3.  Knowledge of the principles of judicious antibiotic use for upper respiratory infections: a survey of senior medical students.

Authors:  Ekopimo Ibia; Michael Sheridan; Richard Schwartz
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 0.954

4.  Insight Into Quality of Prescription Writing - An Instituitional Study.

Authors:  Sujatha Dyasanoor; Ayeesha Urooge
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-03-01

5.  Survey of recent medical graduates' knowledge and understanding of the treatment and prevention of infection.

Authors:  H Humphreys; T Dillane; B O'Connell; L C Luke
Journal:  Ir Med J       Date:  2006-02

Review 6.  The causes of and factors associated with prescribing errors in hospital inpatients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Mary P Tully; Darren M Ashcroft; Tim Dornan; Penny J Lewis; David Taylor; Val Wass
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 5.606

7.  Prevalence, Nature, Severity and Risk Factors for Prescribing Errors in Hospital Inpatients: Prospective Study in 20 UK Hospitals.

Authors:  Darren M Ashcroft; Penny J Lewis; Mary P Tully; Tracey M Farragher; David Taylor; Valerie Wass; Steven D Williams; Tim Dornan
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 5.606

8.  A survey exploring the knowledge and perceptions of senior medical students in Nepal toward generic medicines.

Authors:  Sudesh Gyawali; Mohamed Azmi Hassali; Archana Saha
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2016-08-04

9.  Do final-year medical students have sufficient prescribing competencies? A systematic literature review.

Authors:  David J Brinkman; Jelle Tichelaar; Sanne Graaf; René H J Otten; Milan C Richir; Michiel A van Agtmael
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 10.  How to educate prescribers in antimicrobial stewardship practices.

Authors:  Céline Pulcini; Inge C Gyssens
Journal:  Virulence       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 5.882

View more
  26 in total

1.  Can doctors identify older patients at risk of medication harm following hospital discharge? A multicentre prospective study in the UK.

Authors:  Nikesh Parekh; Jennifer M Stevenson; Rebekah Schiff; J Graham Davies; Stephen Bremner; Tischa Van der Cammen; Jatinder Harchowal; Chakravarthi Rajkumar; Khalid Ali
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  The role of undergraduate teaching, learning and a national prescribing safety assessment in preparation for practical prescribing: UK medical students' perspective.

Authors:  Maria B Kennedy; Inam Haq; Gordon Ferns; Sian E Williams; Michael Okorie
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 4.335

3.  Development of perceived pharmacological deficits of medical students and alumni supports claim for continuous and more application-oriented education.

Authors:  Wencke Johannsen; Bernhard Frings; Stefan Herzig; Jan Matthes
Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol       Date:  2018-09-07       Impact factor: 3.000

4.  Undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacovigilance education: A proposal for appropriate curriculum content.

Authors:  Raquel Herrera Comoglio
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 4.335

5.  Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions about antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance among final year undergraduate medical and pharmacy students at three universities in East Africa.

Authors:  Margaret Lubwama; Jackson Onyuka; Kirabo Tess Ayazika; Leoson Junior Ssetaba; Joseph Siboko; Obedi Daniel; Martha F Mushi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Do final-year medical students have sufficient prescribing competencies? A systematic literature review.

Authors:  David J Brinkman; Jelle Tichelaar; Sanne Graaf; René H J Otten; Milan C Richir; Michiel A van Agtmael
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 4.335

7.  "Hopefully, I will never forget that again" - sensitizing medical students for drug safety by working on cases and simulating doctor-patient communication.

Authors:  Verena Kirsch; Wencke Johannsen; Christian Thrien; Stefan Herzig; Jan Matthes
Journal:  GMS J Med Educ       Date:  2019-03-15

8.  Consensus-based antimicrobial resistance and stewardship competencies for UK undergraduate medical students.

Authors:  David McMaster; Molly Courtenay; Catherine Santucci; Angharad P Davies; Andrew Kirby; Owen Seddon; David A Price; Gavin Barlow; Felicia H Lim; Bethany S Davies; Matthew K O'Shea; Paul Collini; Marina Basarab; Afshan Ahmad; Mahableshwar Albur; Carolyn Hemsley; Nicholas M Brown; Ciaran O'Gorman; Riina Rautemaa-Richardson; Geraint R Davies; Christopher N Penfold; Sanjay Patel
Journal:  JAC Antimicrob Resist       Date:  2020-12-04

9.  An Interprofessional Student-Run Medication Review Program: The Clinical STOPP/START-Based Outcomes of a Controlled Clinical Trial in a Geriatric Outpatient Clinic.

Authors:  Rowan Sultan; Tessa O van den Beukel; Michael O Reumerman; Hester E M Daelmans; Hans Springer; Els Grijmans; Majon Muller; Milan C Richir; Michiel A van Agtmael; Jelle Tichelaar
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 6.903

10.  Antibiotic Use: A Cross-Sectional Study Evaluating the Understanding, Usage and Perspectives of Medical Students and Pathfinders of a Public Defence University in Malaysia.

Authors:  Mainul Haque; Nor Azlina A Rahman; Judy McKimm; Massimo Sartelli; Golam Mohammad Kibria; Md Zakirul Islam; Siti Nur Najihah Binti Lutfi; Nur Syamirah Aishah Binti Othman; Shahidah Leong Binti Abdullah
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.