Veena Nayak1, Shalini Adiga2, Smita Shenoy2, Sadhana Holla3. 1. Associate Professor (Pharmacology), Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India. 2. Professor (Pharmacology), Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India. 3. Assistant Professor (Pharmacology), Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enhancing the prescribing competency of medical students will help them evaluate each case based on their knowledge. It will help them prescribe independently and they will also be able to empathize and counsel patients effectively. In view of this, it was planned to implement a module on prescribing competency and assess the same for undergraduate medical students. METHODS: Faculty training to implement the module was conducted by eminent faculty in this area. After a pre-test, a workshop was conducted for students, wherein they were trained on rational prescribing based on WHO guide to good prescribing followed by small group discussions to identify P (personal) drugs for bronchial asthma and later with comorbidities. Students had to write a prescription and practice communicating the same to a standardized patient. The module was evaluated using a check list (from the WHO guide) and compared with a pre-test. A feedback was provided to the students at the end of the assessment. RESULTS: The scores (median and interquartile values) for prescribing significantly improved from 5 (2, 7) to 25 (24, 27), maximum score being 30. The scores for the communication also increased from 17.5 (14, 24.25) to 53 (52, 55), maximum score being 60, in the post-test. The differences were statistically significant p < 0.01(Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test). The students expressed that their critical thinking and problem solving capabilities had increased and more importantly 'they felt like a doctor'. CONCLUSION: More such modules need to be prepared and prescribing competency needs reinforcement during the clinical years of the medical curriculum for its effective implementation communicating the same to a standardized patient. The module was evaluated using a check list (from the WHO guide) and compared with a pre-test. A feedback was provided to the students at the end of the assessment.
BACKGROUND: Enhancing the prescribing competency of medical students will help them evaluate each case based on their knowledge. It will help them prescribe independently and they will also be able to empathize and counsel patients effectively. In view of this, it was planned to implement a module on prescribing competency and assess the same for undergraduate medical students. METHODS: Faculty training to implement the module was conducted by eminent faculty in this area. After a pre-test, a workshop was conducted for students, wherein they were trained on rational prescribing based on WHO guide to good prescribing followed by small group discussions to identify P (personal) drugs for bronchial asthma and later with comorbidities. Students had to write a prescription and practice communicating the same to a standardized patient. The module was evaluated using a check list (from the WHO guide) and compared with a pre-test. A feedback was provided to the students at the end of the assessment. RESULTS: The scores (median and interquartile values) for prescribing significantly improved from 5 (2, 7) to 25 (24, 27), maximum score being 30. The scores for the communication also increased from 17.5 (14, 24.25) to 53 (52, 55), maximum score being 60, in the post-test. The differences were statistically significant p < 0.01(Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test). The students expressed that their critical thinking and problem solving capabilities had increased and more importantly 'they felt like a doctor'. CONCLUSION: More such modules need to be prepared and prescribing competency needs reinforcement during the clinical years of the medical curriculum for its effective implementation communicating the same to a standardized patient. The module was evaluated using a check list (from the WHO guide) and compared with a pre-test. A feedback was provided to the students at the end of the assessment.
Authors: Yasin I Tayem; Abdulaziz S Altabtabaei; Mohamed W Mohamed; Mansour M Arrfedi; Hasan S Aljawder; Fahad A Aldebous; Henry James; Khalid A J Al Khaja; Reginald P Sequeira Journal: Indian J Pharmacol Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.200