Suchergebnisse

The harmonization of staff education is a key element for ensuring the highest standard of rehabilitation care across Europe. With this aim, the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) has created a Common Training Framework, which consists of a common set of knowledge, skills and competencies for postgraduate medical training. As a body linked to the Physical and Rehabilitation (PRM) Section of the UEMS, the European PRM Board is committed to promoting the harmonization of PRM physicians qualifications. The European PRM Board accomplishes this mission, not only by determining the theoretical knowledge necessary for the practice of the PRM specialty, and the core competencies (training outcomes) to be achieved at the end of training, but also by ascertaining that a standard level of education is achieved and maintained by PRM physicians, through a medically driven system of certification. This paper provides an overview of the methodology and outcomes of the European PRM Board examination, while showing how the approach to PRM education should be considered as a reference point by scientific societies, higher education institutions, health policymakers, patients associations, and all the other bodies caring for high-quality rehabilitation provision to disabled people, at the national and European level.

The harmonization of staff education is a key element for ensuring the highest standard of rehabilitation care across Europe. With this aim, the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) has created a Common Training Framework, which consists of a common set of knowledge, skills and competencies for postgraduate medical training. As a body linked to the Physical and Rehabilitation (PRM) Section of the UEMS, the European PRM Board is committed to promoting the harmonization of PRM physicians qualifications. The European PRM Board accomplishes this mission, not only by determining the theoretical knowledge necessary for the practice of the PRM specialty, and the core competencies (training outcomes) to be achieved at the end of training, but also by ascertaining that a standard level of education is achieved and maintained by PRM physicians, through a medically driven system of certification. This paper provides an overview of the methodology and outcomes of the European PRM Board examination, while showing how the approach to PRM education should be considered as a reference point by scientific societies, higher education institutions, health policymakers, patients associations, and all the other bodies caring for high-quality rehabilitation provision to disabled people, at the national and European level.

The harmonization of staff education is a key element for ensuring the highest standard of rehabilitation care across Europe. With this aim, the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) has created a Common Training Framework, which consists of a common set of knowledge, skills and competencies for postgraduate medical training. As a body linked to the Physical and Rehabilitation (PRM) Section of the UEMS, the European PRM Board is committed to promoting the harmonization of PRM physicians qualifications. The European PRM Board accomplishes this mission, not only by determining the theoretical knowledge necessary for the practice of the PRM specialty, and the core competencies (training outcomes) to be achieved at the end of training, but also by ascertaining that a standard level of education is achieved and maintained by PRM physicians, through a medically driven system of certification. This paper provides an overview of the methodology and outcomes of the European PRM Board examination, while showing how the approach to PRM education should be considered as a reference point by scientific societies, higher education institutions, health policymakers, patients associations, and all the other bodies caring for high-quality rehabilitation provision to disabled people, at the national and European level.

The harmonization of staff education is a key element for ensuring the highest standard of rehabilitation care across Europe. With this aim, the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) has created a Common Training Framework, which consists of a common set of knowledge, skills and competencies for postgraduate medical training. As a body linked to the Physical and Rehabilitation (PRM) Section of the UEMS, the European PRM Board is committed to promoting the harmonization of PRM physicians qualifications. The European PRM Board accomplishes this mission, not only by determining the theoretical knowledge necessary for the practice of the PRM specialty, and the core competencies (training outcomes) to be achieved at the end of training, but also by ascertaining that a standard level of education is achieved and maintained by PRM physicians, through a medically driven system of certification. This paper provides an overview of the methodology and outcomes of the European PRM Board examination, while showing how the approach to PRM education should be considered as a reference point by scientific societies, higher education institutions, health policymakers, patients associations, and all the other bodies caring for high-quality rehabilitation provision to disabled people, at the national and European level.

Programme of the European Society of Surgery 8th annual meeting on general surgery and related specialties, held at the Intercontinental Hotel in St. Julians Malta between the 11 and 14 of November 2004 ; Aware of the diversity of interests arid professional requirements of its members, the Society for the Scientific Committee has prepared a diverse programme which offers scope to its members to share their clinical and research activities in the form of oral communications and posters as well as one which caters for the need to be informed on the latest areas of clinical and academic progress. For this reason a number of well-known European and American experts gave state-of-the art lectures on various topics relating to General Surgery and related specialities and oncology. A multi-national pre-meeting workshop on "Advances in Minimal Access Surgery" proved very beneficial to our young surgeons in training and to those who wish to keep abreast of progress in this field. ; N/A

In 2011, the Danish government announced that from June that year it would no longer cover the costs of medical interpreters for patients who had been living in Denmark for more than seven years. The Dutch Ministry of Health followed with an even more draconian approach; from 1 January 2012 the cost of translation and interpreting would no longer be covered by the state. These two announcements led to widespread concern about whether or not there is a legal foundation for interpreter provision in healthcare. This article considers United Nations treaties, conventions from the Council of Europe and European Union law. European Union member states have been slow to sign up to international agreements to protect the rights of migrant workers. The European Union itself has only recently moved into the area of discrimination and it is unclear if the Race Directive covers language. As a result, access to interpreters in healthcare, where it exists, is dependent on national anti-discrimination legislation or on positive action taken at national or local level rather than on European or international law.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was, to assess and create awareness of specialties of dentistry among medical trainees and teaching faculty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Printed and validated questionnaires were given personally to a total sample of 180 patients, including 60 interns, 40 postgraduate (PG) trainees and 80 teaching staff of Government Medical College. Their responses were collected and the results were tabulated using Micro-Soft Excel 2010. Data obtained was analyzed using the GraphPad Prism 7 statistical software. To compare the responses between the study groups a Pearson's Chi-square test was used. RESULTS: About 96.11% of the sample replied that they are not aware of the different specialties of dentistry and 89.44% of the sample refers their patients to the general dentist without knowing the specialty. About 70% of the interns marked orthodontics as a specialty dealing with fractures of the jaw, whereas 82.5% of the PGs and 95% of the faculty advised referral of the fracture mandible case to the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon. Percentage of correct response for interns, PGS and staff, was 53.33%, 78.75%, and 92.34%, respectively (P ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSION: A large number of interns are not aware of the differences among the branches in Dentistry, specifically between orthodontics, oral-maxillofacial surgery, community dentistry, and Pedodontics. Many medical doctors have misbelief that all of their dental-related issues can be solved by the general dental practitioner. It is the present need to spread the awareness among the medical trainees and doctors about different subspecialties of dentistry to ensure proper referral practices of the dental patients they come across.

This study examines the consequences for medical specialists of participating in multidisciplinary medical team meetings in terms of perceived clinical autonomy, domain distinctiveness, and professional accountability. These consequences may influence their willingness to cooperate and the quality of teamwork. The authors hypothesized that multidisciplinary medical team meetings would be more of a threat to the professional identity of surgical specialists than to the professional identity of nonsurgical and supporting specialists. A survey among 1,827 Dutch medical specialists supported the authors' hypotheses. However, a few specific specialties had response patterns that deviated from our expectations. The results are related to specialty choice, to the training of medical specialties, and to having a role in leading team meetings.

Junqiang Liu,1,2 Paicheng Liu,1 Xue Gong,1 Fengbo Liang1 1School of Government, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China; 2Center for Chinese Public Administration Research, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Junqiang LiuSchool of Government, Sun Yat-sen University, No. 135, Xingang Xi Road, Guangzhou, People's Republic of ChinaTel +86 20-84111433Email liujq26@mail.sysu.edu.cnPaicheng LiuSchool of Government, Sun Yat-sen University, No. 135, Xingang Xi Road, Guangzhou, People's Republic of ChinaTel +86 18580008701Email pai_cheng@126.comBackground: We know a great deal about types, causes, and prevention of medical errors, as well as the risks of each medical specialties. Although we know something about medical errors, much remains to be done in this area particularly around effective prevention. However, little is known about whether medical errors are related to medical specialties. Our objective was to categorize and map the distribution of medical errors and analyze their relationships with medical specialties.Methods: First, public cases of medical disputes were searched on "China Judgment Online" according to the key words including medical errors. Second, we set up a database with 5237 medical litigations. After removing unrelated judgment documents, we used systematic random sampling to extract half of these. Then, we hired two frontline physicians with M.D. to review the litigation documents and independently determine the medical errors and the departments in which they took place. A third physician further reviewed the divergent results. After the descriptive statistical analysis and mind map analysis, semi-structured interviews were further conducted with 63 doctors to reveal the relationships mentioned above.Results: More than 97.8% of medical errors occurred in clinical departments. The insufficient implementation of informed consent obligations is the top medical error in all medical departments [internal medical departments (12.86%, N=36), surgical departments (14.57%, N=106), specialist departments (13.16%, N=86)]. The types of medical errors in diverse medical departments might be associated with therapeutic means used by physicians. Errors related to surgical operations were common in surgical departments, errors related to diagnoses were common in internal medicine departments, and errors related to therapy were common in specialist departments. A lack of clinical experience and undesirable work system design have contributed to the occurrence of medical errors. Inadequate human resources and unreasonable shift systems have increased the workload of staff members and this has in turn increased the incidence rate of medical errors.Conclusion: Medical departments are facing medical errors both in humanity and technology. Medical institutions should be alert to the harm caused by medical humanity (mainly including insufficient communication between physicians and patients, insufficient implementation of infringement of informed consent, infringement of patient's privacy and overtreatment). Improving the clinical skill and vigilance of medical staff is a top priority. Medical institutions should also improve undesirable system designs.Keywords: medical errors, medical specialties, patient safety, medical disputes, China