Students' perceived research skills development and satisfaction after completion of a mandatory research project: results from five cohorts of the Sydney medical program.

BACKGROUND: Research activities undertaken during University studies contribute to preparation of medical students for practice of evidence-based medicine. This study aimed to understand medical students' experiences, perceived research skills development and satisfaction associated with completion of mandatory research projects. METHODS: An online survey was sent to five cohorts of students (n = 1375) from years 2017-2021 at the completion of their research projects. Univariate analysis was conducted to understand students' perception of research skills development, followed by linear regression modeling to explore factors influencing satisfaction with their research project. Manifest content analysis employing a framework approach was used to analyse qualitative data from responses to open ended questions. RESULTS: Response rate was 42%, with 513 (89%) returned surveys being complete and included in analysis. Whilst 37% of students felt they had requisite research skills before undertaking the research project, 84% reported they had these skills after completing the project (χ2 = 8.99, P = 0.02). Mean satisfaction score of the students was 5.0/10 (+/- 2.5, median = 6 (IQR = 3.0-7.0) with 59% of students reporting satisfaction scores higher than the average. Higher satisfaction scores were reported by those who perceived that: research methods and teaching was useful in preparing them for conducting research; the research project helped them acquire new skills; the project resulted in peer-reviewed publication; and, who felt supported by their supervisors. Responses to open ended questions offered important insights into student experience and emphasised the importance of supportive supervisors and the need for a dedicated research block in the busy medical program. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of students reported positive outcomes from the mandatory research project. Student satisfaction can be improved by ensuring supportive research environments and high-quality supervision, and inclusion of dedicated research time in the medical curriculum.

Altruism in death: Attitudes to body and organ donation in Australian students.

Health education, research, and training rely on the altruistic act of body donation for the supply of cadavers. Organ transplantation and research rely on donated organs. Supply of both is limited, with further restrictions in Australia due to requirements for a next-of-kin agreement to donation, irrespective of the deceased's pre-death consent. Research suggests health workers are less likely to support the donation of their own bodies and/or organs, despite recognizing the public good of donation, and that exposure to gross anatomy teaching may negatively affect support for donation. Attitudes to body and organ donation were examined in Australian students studying anatomy. Support for self-body donation (26.5%) was much lower than support for self-organ donation (82.5%). Ten percent of participants would not support the election of a family member or member of the public to donate their body, and just over 4% would not support the election of a family member to donate their organs, with one-to-two percent not supporting this election by a member of the public. Exposure to gross anatomy teaching was associated with an increased likelihood of consideration of issues about body and organ donation, whether for self, family, or the public, and registration as an organ donor. Exposure decreased participants' willingness to donate their own body, with those who practiced a religion least likely to support body donation. Gross anatomy courses provide an opportunity to inform future healthcare workers about altruistic donation, albeit with a recognition that religious or cultural beliefs may affect willingness to donate.

Research supervisors' views of barriers and enablers for research projects undertaken by medical students; a mixed methods evaluation of a post-graduate medical degree research project program.

BACKGROUND: Medical degree programs use scholarly activities to support development of basic research skills, critical evaluation of medical information and promotion of medical research. The University of Sydney Doctor of Medicine Program includes a compulsory research project. Medical student projects are supervised by academic staff and affiliates, including biomedical science researchers and clinician-academics. This study investigated research supervisors' observations of the barriers to and enablers of successful medical student research projects. METHODS: Research supervisors (n = 130) completed an anonymous, online survey after the completion of the research project. Survey questions targeted the research supervisors' perceptions of barriers to successful completion of projects and sources of support for their supervision of the student project. Data were analysed by descriptive statistics and using manifest content analysis. Further quantitative investigation was made by cross-tabulation according to prior research supervision experience. RESULTS: Research supervisors reported that students needed both generic skills (75%) and research-based skills (71%) to successfully complete the project. The major barrier to successful research projects was the lack of protected time for research activities (61%). The assessment schedule with compulsory progress milestones enabled project completion (75%), and improved scientific presentation (90%) and writing (93%) skills. Supervisors requested further support for their students for statistics (75%), scientific writing (51%), and funding for projects (52%). Prior research supervision experience influenced the responses. Compared to novice supervisors, highly experienced supervisors were significantly more likely to want students to be allocated dedicated time for the project (P < 0.01) and reported higher rates of access to expert assistance in scientific writing, preparing ethics applications and research methodology. Novice supervisors reported higher rates of unexpected project delays and data acquisition problems (P < 0.05). Co-supervision was favoured by experienced supervisors but rejected by novice supervisors. CONCLUSIONS: Both generic and research-related skills were important for medical student research project success. Overall, protected research time, financial and other academic support were identified as factors that would improve the research project program. Prior research supervision experience influences perceptions of program barriers and enablers. These findings will inform future support needs for projects and research supervisor training for the research supervision role.

Use and Outcome of Local Anesthetic Painkilling Injections in Athletes: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The use of local anesthetic painkilling injections to improve player availability is common practice in elite-level sport. OBJECTIVE: To document the published use of local anesthetic injections in sport, according to number of injections, sites of injections, and complications reported. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews, SportDiscus, EBSCO Host, and Google Scholar. RESULTS: One thousand nine hundred seventy local anesthetic injections reported on 540 athletes in 10 studies (from rugby league, American football, Australian football, and soccer) were reviewed. The most common areas of injection were as follows: the acromioclavicular (AC) joint; hand (including fingers); sternoclavicular joint (including sternum); rib injuries; and iliac crest contusions. DISCUSSION: This review found some evidence of long-term safety for a limited number of injection sites (eg, AC joint) and some evidence of immediate complications and harmful long-term consequences for other sites. The quality of evidence is not high, with little long-term data and a lack of independent verification of the effects of the injections. Ideally, long-term follow-up should be conducted to determine whether these injections are safe, with follow-up undertaken independently of the treating physician and team. CONCLUSIONS: Based on limited publications, there is some evidence of long-term safety; however, there is a lack of clear proof of either absolute safety or long-term harm for many of these procedures. Physicians and players in professional sport should proceed with caution in using local anesthetic injections.