Background: Foundation doctors often feel underprepared to cope with uncertainty, particularly in an acute setting. Simulation is an established method for teaching about the management of acutely unwell patients, yet simulated cases are often simplified to ensure that a given learning outcome is reached. This approach may present learners with challenges in clinical practice when more complex nuanced cases are encountered. We explored final-year medical students' perceptions of clinical uncertainty when facing an 'authentically' complex simulated patient. Methods: We adapted a simulation scenario in an attempt to replicate clinical uncertainty. The simulated patient had a confused history, only mildly deranged physiology, no current clear diagnosis and no diagnostic investigations yet available. Students engaged in debriefs facilitated by the researchers, which employed advocacy and enquiry to help students to reflect on their simulations (the 'Diamond Approach'). These were transcribed, coded and analysed thematically. Results: Students found the 'uncertainty' simulation more challenging than a 'typical' simulation. Students found it disheartening when the patient had no clear diagnosis and We delivered simulations that ran contrary to 'typical' presentations in an effort to provoke clinical uncertainty

Objective The study sought to identify smartphone apps that support hand hygiene practice and to assess their content, technical and functional features, and quality. A secondary objective was to make design and research recommendations for future apps. Materials and Methods We searched the UK Google Play and Apple App stores for hand hygiene smartphone apps aimed at adults. Information regarding content, technical and functional features was extracted and summarized. Two raters evaluated each app, using the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality score and the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). Results A total of 668 apps were identified, with 90 meeting the inclusion criteria. Most (96%) were free to download. The majority (78%) intended to educate or inform or remind users to hand wash (69%), using behavior change techniques such as personalization and prompting practice. Only 20% and 4% named a best practice guideline or had expert involvement in development, respectively. Innovative means of engagement were used in 42% (eg, virtual or augmented reality or geolocation-based reminders). Apps included an average of 2.4 out of 10 of the IMS functionality criteria (range, 0-8). The mean MARS score was 3.2 ± 0.5 out of 5, and 68% had a minimum acceptability score of 3. Two had been tested or trialed. Conclusions Although many hand hygiene apps exist, few provide content on best practice. Many did not meet the minimum acceptability criterion for quality or were formally trialed or tested. Research should assess the feasibility and effectiveness of hand hygiene apps (especially within healthcare settings), including when and how they “work.” We recommend that future apps to support hand hygiene practice are developed with infection prevention and control experts and align with best practice. Robust research is needed to determine which innovative methods of engagement create “sticky” apps.

Aims and objectives: the purpose of this pilot study was to explore the attitudes and perceptions of members of the UK public towards self-care for minor ailments. Background: with an ageing and increasing population, and an NHS under extreme pressure, methods to reduce demand on health services are vital. Increasing the use of self-care for minor ailments is one way in which this pressure could be alleviated. Design and method: this study used qualitative methods including semi-structured telephone interviews. The data were then evaluated, and key themes drawn out using thematic analysis. Findings: the results showed that the public are aware of the notion of self-care, and some are engaging with it. However, for a number of reasons, patients are still likely to want a face-to-face appointment despite the use of online and telephone advice services. Conclusion: the study highlighted that there are multifactorial aspects impacting on a patient's likelihood of engaging in self-care when faced with a minor illness. The results are not generalisable to every member of the public, but interesting questions are raised with regard to the usefulness of current public health messages in various media when there appears to be a lack of desire from the public to use some recommended services.

ImportanceDown syndrome is the leading genetic cause of intellectual disability and automatically qualifies individuals for Social Security Insurance. Therefore, Medicaid is the major health insurance provider for a population at high risk for dementia, obesity, and premature mortality. Despite the importance of Medicaid for adults with Down syndrome, little is known about how this population uses Medicaid.ObjectiveTo describe enrollment in, health care use in, and cost to Medicaid for adults with Down syndrome compared with adults with intellectual disability and a random sample of adults enrolled in Medicaid.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this cohort study, the data are from a claims cohort of adults aged 18 years or older enrolled in Medicaid at any point between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2019. Participants were enrollees with 1 or more inpatient claim or 2 or more other claims with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code or an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision code for Down syndrome or intellectual disability as well as a random sample of those without developmental disability. Analyses were conducted from June 2022 to February 2023.Main Outcomes and MeasuresData were linked across 2 data reporting systems. Main outcomes were enrollee demographic characteristics, enrollment characteristics, cost, and service use.ResultsThis cohort study included 123 024 individuals with Down syndrome (820 273 person-years of coverage; mean [SD] age, 35 [14.7] years; median age, 33 years [IQR, 21-48 years]; 51.6% men; 14.1% Black individuals; 16.7% Hispanic individuals; and 74.6% White individuals), 1 182 246 individuals with intellectual disability (mean [SD] age, 37.1 [16.8] years; median age, 33 years [IQR, 22-50 years]; 56.5% men; 22.0% Black individuals; 11.7% Hispanic individuals; and 69.5% White individuals), and 3 176 371 individuals with no developmental disabilities (mean [SD] age, 38 [18.6] years; median age, 33 years [IQR, 21-52 years]; 43.8% men; 23.7% Black individuals; 20.7% Hispanic individuals; and 61.3% White individuals). Median enrollment in Medicaid for a person with Down syndrome was 8.0 years (IQR, 5.0-9.0 years; mean [SD], 6.6 [2.6] years). Costs were higher for the Down syndrome group (median, $26 278 per person-year [IQR, $11 145-$55 928 per person-year]) relative to the group with no developmental disabilities (median, $6173 per person-year [IQR, $868-$58 390 per person-year]). Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native American, and Pacific Islander adults with Down syndrome had fewer costs and claims per person-year compared with White adults with Down syndrome.Conclusion and RelevanceThis cohort study of individuals with Down syndrome enrolled in Medicaid found consistent enrollment and high use of health care in a population with high health care needs. Results were similar comparing individuals with Down syndrome and those with intellectual disability, with both groups differing from a sample of Medicaid enrollees with no developmental disabilities. Medicaid data are a useful tool for understanding the health and well-being of individuals with Down syndrome.