A peer mentoring group for junior clinician educators: four years' experience.

PURPOSE: To study the effect of a peer mentoring group (PMG). METHOD: Six junior clinician educator faculty and one senior faculty at the University of Washington Medical Center's Department of Psychiatry formed a PMG in 2006. The PMG had 30 meetings during 2006-2010. Group format, goals, and meeting agendas were determined solely by participants. Feedback about positive and negative outcomes of participation in the PMG was determined by open-ended response to three sets of questions; qualitative analysis was performed by an outside research consultant. RESULTS: Program evaluation revealed benefits and undesirable or unintended outcomes. Reported benefits were increased workplace satisfaction; improved social connection; increased professional productivity and personal growth/development through accountability, collaboration, mutual learning, support, and information sharing; synergy, collaboration, and diversity of thought; increased involvement in professional activities; opportunity for peer discussions in a safe environment; and increased accountability and motivation. Undesirable or unintentional outcomes were exclusivity, lack of hierarchy, scheduling of meetings, absence of an intentional curriculum, diverse and competing interests, personal-professional enmeshment, and occasional loss of focus due to overemphasis on personal matters. Every member of the PMG was retained, and scholarly productivity increased, as did collaboration with other group members. CONCLUSIONS: Participants in this PMG experienced qualitative benefits and perceived advantages in career advancement and scholarly productivity. Negative consequences did not deter participation in the PMG or outweigh benefits. The self-sufficient and low-cost structure makes it particularly portable.

Ceftriaxone and cefotaxime use in Victorian hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To determine patterns of use of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime (CEFX) in Victorian hospitals and to identify areas for improvement. DESIGN, PATIENTS AND SETTING: A concurrent, observational evaluation of CEFX use in patients commencing a course of these drugs between 8 and 14 September, 1999, in 51 Victorian hospitals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients treated with CEFX; indications; duration of use; concordance with recommendations of national antibiotic guidelines (Therapeutic guidelines: antibiotic, 10th edition [AG10]). RESULTS: 671 patients were treated with CEFX. The overall rate of use was 43 patients per 1000 inpatient separations. Treatment of respiratory tract infection accounted for 352 patients (52%) and surgical prophylaxis for 99 patients (15%). Treatment of skin/soft tissue, urinary tract and gastrointestinal tract infections accounted for about 7% of patients each. The median duration of CEFX courses was 3.0 days. The overall rate of concordance with indications recommended in AG10 was 27%. The rate of concordance for empirical treatment of respiratory tract infection was 24%. Of the 195 patients treated empirically with CEFX for community-acquired respiratory tract infection and assessed as non-concordant, 64% did not have radiological evidence of pneumonia, and a further 30% did not fulfill the criteria for severe pneumonia. All courses given for surgical prophylaxis were non-concordant. CONCLUSIONS: CEFX is widely used in Victorian hospitals, mostly to treat lower respiratory tract infection and in surgical prophylaxis of infection. The rate of concordance with AG10 is low. Potential areas for intervention include empirical treatment of respiratory tract infection and use in surgical prophylaxis.