Cargando…

Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits

BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disability (ID) have multiple and complex health needs, more frequent healthcare episodes, and experience poorer health outcomes. Research conducted two decades ago showed that medical professionals were lacking in the knowledge and skills required to address the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Trollor, Julian N., Eagleson, Claire, Ruffell, Beth, Tracy, Jane, Torr, Jennifer J., Durvasula, Seeta, Iacono, Teresa, Cvejic, Rachael C., Lennox, Nicholas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7507627/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32958040
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02235-w
_version_ 1783585266927140864
author Trollor, Julian N.
Eagleson, Claire
Ruffell, Beth
Tracy, Jane
Torr, Jennifer J.
Durvasula, Seeta
Iacono, Teresa
Cvejic, Rachael C.
Lennox, Nicholas
author_facet Trollor, Julian N.
Eagleson, Claire
Ruffell, Beth
Tracy, Jane
Torr, Jennifer J.
Durvasula, Seeta
Iacono, Teresa
Cvejic, Rachael C.
Lennox, Nicholas
author_sort Trollor, Julian N.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disability (ID) have multiple and complex health needs, more frequent healthcare episodes, and experience poorer health outcomes. Research conducted two decades ago showed that medical professionals were lacking in the knowledge and skills required to address the complex needs of this patient group. The aim of the current study was to determine whether Australian undergraduate medical schools that offer ID health education content had changed the amount and nature of such teaching over this period. METHODS: Identical or equivalent questionnaire items were compared across eight Australian medical schools that participated in curricula audits conducted in 1995 (referred to as T1) and 2013/14 (T2). The audits were of the nature of the ID content, methods used to teach it, and who taught it. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the number of hours of compulsory ID content offered to medical students at T2 (total = 158.3 h; median = 2.8 h per ID unit) compared with T1 (total = 171 h; median = 2.5 h). At T2 compared with T1, units with ID content taught in the area of general practice had increased (2 units; 3.6% to 7 units; 16.3%), while decreases were seen in paediatrics (22 units; 40.0% to 10 units; 23.3%) and psychiatry (10 units; 18.2% to 4 units; 9.3%). The number of schools using problem- and/or enquiry-based learning rose to six at T2 from one at T1. Inclusive teaching practices (people with ID develop or deliver content) in compulsory/elective units had increased at T2 (10 units; 23.3%) compared with T1 (6 units; 10.9%), but direct clinical contact with people with ID had decreased (29 units; 52.7% to 11 units; 25.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, little progress has been made to address the gaps in ID education for medical students identified from an audit conducted in 1995. Renewal of ID content in medical curricula is indicated as a key element in efforts to improve workforce capacity in this area and reduce barriers to care, with the aim of reversing the poor health outcomes currently seen for this group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7507627
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75076272020-09-23 Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits Trollor, Julian N. Eagleson, Claire Ruffell, Beth Tracy, Jane Torr, Jennifer J. Durvasula, Seeta Iacono, Teresa Cvejic, Rachael C. Lennox, Nicholas BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disability (ID) have multiple and complex health needs, more frequent healthcare episodes, and experience poorer health outcomes. Research conducted two decades ago showed that medical professionals were lacking in the knowledge and skills required to address the complex needs of this patient group. The aim of the current study was to determine whether Australian undergraduate medical schools that offer ID health education content had changed the amount and nature of such teaching over this period. METHODS: Identical or equivalent questionnaire items were compared across eight Australian medical schools that participated in curricula audits conducted in 1995 (referred to as T1) and 2013/14 (T2). The audits were of the nature of the ID content, methods used to teach it, and who taught it. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the number of hours of compulsory ID content offered to medical students at T2 (total = 158.3 h; median = 2.8 h per ID unit) compared with T1 (total = 171 h; median = 2.5 h). At T2 compared with T1, units with ID content taught in the area of general practice had increased (2 units; 3.6% to 7 units; 16.3%), while decreases were seen in paediatrics (22 units; 40.0% to 10 units; 23.3%) and psychiatry (10 units; 18.2% to 4 units; 9.3%). The number of schools using problem- and/or enquiry-based learning rose to six at T2 from one at T1. Inclusive teaching practices (people with ID develop or deliver content) in compulsory/elective units had increased at T2 (10 units; 23.3%) compared with T1 (6 units; 10.9%), but direct clinical contact with people with ID had decreased (29 units; 52.7% to 11 units; 25.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, little progress has been made to address the gaps in ID education for medical students identified from an audit conducted in 1995. Renewal of ID content in medical curricula is indicated as a key element in efforts to improve workforce capacity in this area and reduce barriers to care, with the aim of reversing the poor health outcomes currently seen for this group. BioMed Central 2020-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7507627/ /pubmed/32958040 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02235-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Trollor, Julian N.
Eagleson, Claire
Ruffell, Beth
Tracy, Jane
Torr, Jennifer J.
Durvasula, Seeta
Iacono, Teresa
Cvejic, Rachael C.
Lennox, Nicholas
Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits
title Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits
title_full Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits
title_fullStr Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits
title_full_unstemmed Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits
title_short Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits
title_sort has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in australian medical schools improved? a 20-year comparison of curricula audits
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7507627/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32958040
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02235-w
work_keys_str_mv AT trollorjuliann hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT eaglesonclaire hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT ruffellbeth hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT tracyjane hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT torrjenniferj hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT durvasulaseeta hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT iaconoteresa hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT cvejicrachaelc hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits
AT lennoxnicholas hasteachingaboutintellectualdisabilityhealthcareinaustralianmedicalschoolsimproveda20yearcomparisonofcurriculaaudits