Educational environments in Asian medical schools: A cross-national comparison between Malaysia, Singapore, and China.

INTRODUCTION: Perceptions of the educational environment (EE) represent an important source of information on medical students' learning experience. Understanding and addressing these perceptions can help inform initiatives designed to improve the learning experience and educational outcomes, while comparison of student perceptions across medical schools can provide an added perspective. The aim of the study was to compare the EEs of three Asian medical schools: Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland and University College Dublin Malaysia Campus, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, Singapore and Xiangya School of Medicine, China. METHODS: Medical students in the clinical years (N = 1063) participated in a cross-sectional study using the Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM). Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22. RESULTS: There were significant differences between the three medical schools in the total DREEM scores (F [2, 1059] = 38.29, p < .001), but all were in the category "more positive than negative" (mean score 135.42, range 128.97-142.44). Highest DREEM scores were noted in year 5 at RUMC (139.79 ± 79), year 3 at YLL (145.93 ± 14.52), and year 4 at XSM (138.56 ± 18.91). Variations in total and subscale DREEM scores were also found between clinical years in each medical school. DISCUSSION: Total DREEM scores at the three medical schools are similar to those reported from other undergraduate settings. However, significant variations occurred in perceptions of the EE, as students progressed through the clinical years. Greater attention to the learning environment and the curriculum may improve students' educational experience.

A pilot, quasi-experimental, mixed methods investigation into the efficacy of a group psychotherapy intervention for caregivers of outpatients with cancer: the COPE study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the rising trend of cancer prevalence and increase in family caregiving, little attention has been paid to the efficacy of psychosocial interventions among Asian caregiver samples, particularly support groups, given the benefits that have been shown in studies on Western populations. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a pilot 4-week group psychotherapy for Singaporean family caregivers of patients receiving outpatient care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Facilitated by a clinical psychologist, this intervention is primarily based on the brief integrative psychological therapy with a supportive-expressive intent. Participants will be recruited while they are accompanying their care recipients for outpatient consultations. Since this is a pilot study, a sample size of 120 participants is targeted on the basis of sample sizes of previous studies. The study adopts a quasi-experimental design, as participants are assigned the intervention or control arms based on their availability to attend the intervention. A mixed methods approach is used to evaluate the outcomes of the intervention. A self-administered battery of tests is completed at four time points: baseline, postintervention and follow-up at 1-month and 2-month postinterventions; semi-structured interviews are conducted at baseline and post-intervention. Primary outcomes are quality of life and anxious and depressive symptoms; secondary outcomes are stress and basic psychological needs. Analysis using analysis of covariance would be conducted to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol has ethics approval from the National Healthcare Group Domain Specific Review Board (NHG DSRB Ref: 2013/00662). Written informed consent is obtained from every participant. Results will be disseminated through journals and conferences, and will be particularly relevant for clinicians intending to implement similar support groups to address the psychosocial concerns of caregivers, as well as for researchers seeking to refine the structure and evaluate the effectiveness of such programmes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Current Controlled Trials NCT02120183 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02120183).

Non-adherence in patients on peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: It has been increasingly recognized that non-adherence is an important factor that determines the outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy. There is therefore a need to establish the levels of non-adherence to different aspects of the PD regimen (dialysis procedures, medications, and dietary/fluid restrictions). METHODS: A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature was performed in PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases using PRISMA guidelines in May 2013. Publications on non-adherence in PD were selected by two reviewers independently according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Relevant data on patient characteristics, measures, rates and factors associated with non-adherence were extracted. The quality of studies was also evaluated independently by two reviewers according to a revised version of the Effective Public Health Practice Project assessment tool. RESULTS: The search retrieved 204 studies, of which a total of 25 studies met inclusion criteria. Reported rates of non-adherence varied across studies: 2.6-53% for dialysis exchanges, 3.9-85% for medication, and 14.4-67% for diet/fluid restrictions. Methodological differences in measurement and definition of non-adherence underlie the observed variation. Factors associated with non-adherence that showed a degree of consistency were mostly socio-demographical, such as age, employment status, ethnicity, sex, and time period on PD treatment. CONCLUSION: Non-adherence to different dimensions of the dialysis regimen appears to be prevalent in PD patients. There is a need for further, high-quality research to explore these factors in more detail, with the aim of informing intervention designs to facilitate adherence in this patient population.