Misprescribing controlled substances: An evaluation of a professional development program.

BACKGROUND: Controlled prescription drug (CPD) abuse has reached epidemic proportions in the United States. Most physicians attending a 3-day continuing medical education (CME) professional development program (PDP) lack training in identifying risk and in managing patients who misuse CPDs. To address this issue, the authors conducted an evaluation of a PDP that trains physicians on proper prescribing, identifying substance abuse, utilizing screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT), and implementing motivational interviewing (MI). METHODS: The authors conducted a program evaluation to assess the efficacy and impact of the PDP on physicians' knowledge and prescribing behaviors. RESULTS: Participants (N = 174) were typically middle-aged (average age of 53 years), male (89%), and physicians (82%) and other health care professionals (18%). Many physicians practice in solo primary care settings (46%). Course evaluations were completed by n = 155 (89%) participants who rated the course and presenters highly (mean 4.8/5 respectively). Physicians' knowledge scores on pre/post assessments increased significantly: pretest (M = 58.7, SD = 13.12) and posttest (M = 78.28, SD = 9.83) (t(173) = 20.06, P ≤ .0001, 95% confidence interval, CI: [-21.51, -17.65]). Almost half of the participants, n = 83/174 (48%), completed the follow-up survey, and 93% agreed/strongly agreed (A/SA) they made professional practice changes. Of participants practicing with an active DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) registration (n = 57), most agreed/strongly agreed they implemented changes to align their practices with current guidelines (89%), used CPD more appropriately (87%), implemented office policies on prescribing (81%), identified and referred more substance abuse patients to treatment (80%), shared new information/experience from course with other 25 health professionals (93%), and felt the course positively impacted their behaviors personally and professionally (90% and 96%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first known study evaluating a PDP in this population. Results demonstrated participant satisfaction and improvement in prescribers' knowledge and self-reported prescribing behaviors. However, further study is needed to assess actual clinical practice changes, direct impact on patient outcomes, and rates of recidivism.

Twelve tips for developing, implementing, and sustaining medical education fellowship programs: Building on new trends and solid foundations.

Medical education fellowship programs (MEFPs) are a form of faculty development contributing to an organization's educational mission and participants' career development. Building an MEFP requires a systematic design, implementation, and evaluation approach which aligns institutional and individual faculty goals. Implementing an MEFP requires a team of committed individuals who provide expertise, guidance, and mentoring. Qualified MEFP directors should utilize instructional methods that promote individual and institutional short and long term growth. Directors must balance the use of traditional design, implementation, and evaluation methodologies with advancing trends that may support or threaten the acceptability and sustainability of the program. Drawing on the expertise of 28 MEFP directors, we provide twelve tips as a guide to those implementing, sustaining, and/or growing a successful MEFP whose value is demonstrated by its impacts on participants, learners, patients, teaching faculty, institutions, the greater medical education community, and the population's health.

Searching for answers: proper prescribing of controlled prescription drugs.

Prescription drug abuse is increasing at alarming rates in this country. Most often drugs are obtained through relatives or friends. An important step in addressing this problem is educating healthcare providers in the proper prescribing of scheduled drugs. Physicians and other healthcare workers receive little training in proper screening for substance abuse, proper prescribing of scheduled drugs, and referral for those needing treatment. Continuing medical education is one venue for addressing this problem. However, screening, brief intervention and referral for treatment (SBIRT) should be taught in medical school and residency.

Using standardized patients in continuing medical education courses on proper prescribing of controlled substances.

Controlled prescription drug (CPD) abuse is an increasing threat to patient safety and health care providers (HCPs) are not adequately prepared nor do they routinely employ proper screening techniques. Using standardized patients (SPs) as an instructional strategy, the trained physicians on proper prescribing practices and SBIRT (Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment) in a continuing medical education (CME) course. The authors compared two physician cohorts receiving standard CME course (control) versus CME plus SP practice. They measured knowledge and attitudes in all participants and skills and perceived competence in the SP group only. Knowledge and attitudes improved significantly for both groups. Screening behaviors for CPD use also improved. Participants overestimated their performance but increased their use of SBIRT with practice. The SP comfort levels with physician's competence improved after 2 practice sessions. Standardized patients can be an effective teaching tool in CME courses. Impact on knowledge or attitudes did not increase significantly over controls.