Bridging the Gap between Research and Practice
Gres, 27 rue Voiture, Amiens 80000, France.The American journal of medicine (Impact Factor: 5). 06/2011; 124(11):e15. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.04.015
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Much of the respect and trust that society grants to physicians is based on the expectation of upholding professional values. We performed this study to assess responses to common challenges to medical professionalism and to ascertain physician satisfaction with training in professionalism. A self-administered questionnaire containing six challenges to professionalism (acceptance of gifts, conflict of interest, confidentiality, physician impairment, sexual harassment, and honesty) with multiple-choice responses was mailed to 528 medical students and 779 house officers at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center and to 900 randomly selected Colorado physicians. Information about previous exposure to the issue depicted in the scenarios and satisfaction with, and site of, previous education in medical professionalism was obtained. An independent panel selected the best or acceptable answers to the challenges. In all, 961 evaluable responses were received. More than 40% of physicians reported experience with four of the six challenges. The frequency of the best or acceptable answers to the six scenarios ranged from 12% to 86%. Best or acceptable responses were more common in physicians than in house officers, and in house officers than in medical students (P < 0.001). Practice setting and specialty type had only modest effects. The physician impairment scenario was the most challenging: Only 12% of physicians provided the best answer. Most (73%) respondents reported having 10 or fewer hours of formal course work in professionalism, and many (40%) were dissatisfied with their training in professionalism. While everyday challenges to professionalism are commonly encountered by trainees and practicing physicians, many practitioners are dissatisfied with their training in this area and were unable to provide an acceptable answer to these challenges.The American Journal of Medicine 02/2000; 108(2):136-42. DOI:10.1016/S0002-9343(99)00405-2 · 5.00 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: New National Institutes of Health policies call for expansion of practice-based research to improve the clinical research enterprise and facilitate dissemination of evidence-based medicine. This paper describes organizational strategies that influence clinicians' decisions to participate in clinical research. We reviewed the literature and interviewed over 200 clinicians and stakeholders. The most common barriers to community clinician participation in clinical research relate to beliefs that clinical research is too burdensome and has little benefit for the participating clinician or patient. We identified a number of approaches healthcare organizations can use to encourage clinicians to participate in research, including an outreach campaign to promote the benefits of clinical research; selection of study topics of interest to clinicians; establishment and enforcement of a set of research principles valuing the clinician and patient; development of a transparent schedule of reimbursement for research tasks; provision of technological and technical assistance to practices as needed; and promotion of a sense of community among clinicians involved in practice-based research. Many types of existing healthcare organizations could provide the technical and intellectual assistance community clinicians need to participate in clinical research. Multiple approaches are possible.Implementation Science 04/2011; 6(1):35. DOI:10.1186/1748-5908-6-35 · 4.12 Impact Factor
- Corporation for Non-Promotion-Based Medicine About us Available at: http://www.nofreelunch.org/aboutus.htm. Accessed March 16, 2011. Funding: None. Conflict of Interest: None. Authorship: The author is solely responsible for writing this manu-script..
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.