Prescribing for surgical patients compared to overall prescribing skills of foundation year 1 doctors: A study by the avoiding prescribing errors (APE) committee

Abstract

s / International Journal of Surgery 10 (2012) S53–S109 S78 ABSTRACTS Method: 359 trainees across all subspecialties and UK regions were surveyed in 2011 regarding ISCP, compared to 539 users surveyed in 2008.1 5-point scales were analysed using chi-squared tests. Results: 79% used ISCP, 38% elogbook and 5% OCAP. 201 responders (56%) evaluated ISCP v8. 59% had registered before 2008 and 31% since. Modal ratings were ‘average' throughout, with the following percentages of responders rating ‘poor' or worse versus ‘good' or better the domains: registration 12% vs 35%; assessments 36% vs 22%; peer assessment tool 34% vs 25%; recording meetings 34% vs 19%; helpdesk 11% vs 40%. Trainees were neutral about training impact and 44% thought ISCP was needed. Statistically significant (p<0.001) improvements were seen in satisfaction throughout domains comparing v8 to v5. Conclusions: While satisfaction with ISCP has improved significantly during the last 3 years and its registration and helpdesk support are considered good, its assessment and meeting recording features remain average or worse. Increased satisfaction and ISCP's perceived necessity may reflect an increased proportion of respondents who commenced training after its introduction. 0697: PRESCRIBING FOR SURGICAL PATIENTS COMPARED TO OVERALL PRESCRIBING SKILLS OF FOUNDATION YEAR 1 DOCTORS: A STUDY BY THE AVOIDING PRESCRIBING ERRORS (APE) COMMITTEE Sarantos Kaptanis , Louise Congdon , Nick Ward , Luke Arwynck , Charlene McInnes , Dhanesh Solanki , Gideon Kotey , Stella Vig . Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, Surrey, UK; APE