Pharmacogenomics describes interpatient genetic variability in drug responses. Information based on whole genome sequencing will soon open up the field of pharmacogenomics and facilitate the use of genomic information relating to drug metabolism and drug responses. We undertook a qualitative study, aiming to explore the potential barriers, opportunities and challenges facing the implementation of pharmacogenomics into primary care. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 18 clinical participants (16 GPs and 2 other clinicians). All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Using a thematic analysis approach, data items were coded, ordered and themes constructed. Most participants were aged 55-60 years and worked as part-time clinical GPs with other clearly defined roles. The emerging themes covered several areas of concern, including the following: the utility of pharmacogenomics and the value of introducing such testing into primary care; how to educate the primary care workforce and 'mainstream' pharmacogenomics; the ethical, legal and social aspects of pharmacogenomics and its impact on patients; and potential impacts on the healthcare system particularly around economics and informatics. Most participants had concerns about pharmacogenomics and felt that there were a number of barriers and challenges to its implementation into routine primary care. Most striking were their concerns around the cost-effectiveness of using pharmacogenomics in primary care. At the same time most recognised the increasing availability of direct-to-consumer testing, and felt that this would drive the need to understand the ethical and social implications of using genomic information in primary care. This study has raised important issues that need to be considered when planning the implementation of pharmacogenomics into clinical practice. Prior to the implementation of genomic testing into day-today practice in UK primary care, it is important that considerations around education, cost-effectiveness and informatics are addressed, as well as the impact on patients.

Population ageing poses many challenges in the landscape of general medicine. One of these is the requirement for more geriatricians to minimise future strain on healthcare systems. Previous studies have identified that, while demand for geriatricians is on the rise, interest among medical students for a career in geriatrics falls behind. We utilised a new augmented reality technology (the Microsoft HoloLens 2) to deliver students a remote bedside teaching experience. Features of this teaching included bi-directional communication, exposure to physical signs, and use of holograms around the patient bedside as a teaching aid. Given its convenience, scope and engagement potential, this educational tool has potential to be used effectively throughout medical training.

No abstract

Objective This study compared knowledge attainment and student enjoyment and engagement between clinical case vignette, patient-testimony videos and mixed reality (MR) teaching via the Microsoft HoloLens 2, all delivered remotely to third year medical students. The feasibility of conducting MR teaching on a large scale was also assessed. Setting & Participants Medical students in Year 3 at Imperial College London participated in three online teaching sessions, one in each format. All students were expected to attend these scheduled teaching sessions and to complete the formative assessment. Inclusion of their data used as part of the research trial was optional. Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures The primary outcome measure was performance on a formative assessment, which served to compare knowledge attainment between three forms of online learning. Moreover, we aimed to explore student engagement with each form of learning via a questionnaire, and also feasibility of applying MR as a teaching tool on a large scale. Comparisons between performances on the formative assessment between the three groups were investigated using a repeated measures two-way ANOVA. Engagement and enjoyment were also analysed in the same manner. Results A total of 252 students participated in the study. Knowledge attainment of students using MR was comparable with the other two methods. Participants reported higher enjoyment and engagement (p<0.001) for the case vignette method, compared with MR and video-based teaching. There was no difference in enjoyment or engagement ratings between MR and the video-based methods. Conclusion This study demonstrated that the implementation of MR is an effective, acceptable, and feasible way of teaching clinical medicine to undergraduate students on a large scale. However, case-based tutorials were found to be favoured most by students. Future work could further explore the best uses for MR teaching within the medical curriculum.

Previous literature has explored unconscious racial biases in clinical education and medicine, finding that people with darker skin tones can be underrepresented in learning resources and managed differently in a clinical setting. This study aimed to examine whether patient skin colour can affect the diagnostic ability and confidence of medical students, and their cognitive reasoning processes. We presented students with 12 different clinical presentations on both white skin (WS) and non-white skin (NWS). A think aloud (TA) study was conducted to explore students’ cognitive reasoning processes (n = 8). An online quiz was also conducted where students submitted a diagnosis and confidence level for each clinical presentation (n = 185). In the TA interviews, students used similar levels of information gathering and analytical reasoning for each skin type but appeared to display increased uncertainty and reduced non-analytical reasoning methods for the NWS images compared to the WS images. In the online quiz, students were significantly more likely to accurately diagnose five of the 12 clinical presentations (shingles, cellulitis, Lyme disease, eczema and meningococcal disease) on WS compared to NWS (p < 0.01). With regards to students’ confidence, they were significantly more confident diagnosing eight of the 12 clinical presentations (shingles, cellulitis, Lyme disease, eczema, meningococcal disease, urticaria, chickenpox and Kawasaki disease) on WS when compared to NWS (p < 0.01). These findings highlight the need to improve teaching resources to include a greater diversity of skin colours exhibiting clinical signs, to improve students’ knowledge and confidence, and ultimately, to avoid patients being misdiagnosed due to the colour of their skin.

AimsTo ascertain whether patients prescribed second generation antipsychotics for off-label indications are being monitored and screened adequately for physical health side-effects.BackgroundThe prevalence of off-label antipsychotic use has increased significantly over recent decades. Common off-licence uses include dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder, adjunctive treatment for unipolar depression and personality disorders. Recent studies have demonstrated that up to 65% of antipsychotic prescriptions are now off-label. Since the metabolic side-effects of second-generation antipsychotics are well-established, guidelines have emphasised the need for active, routine physical health screening of all individuals taking these drugs. However, there have been few studies or reviews which have specifically investigated screening rates of individuals receiving antipsychotic medications for off-licence indications.MethodAn audit of patients taking second-generation antipsychotics for off-label indications, under the caseload of Neighbourhoods 1, 3 and 4 of Lewisham Assessment & Liaison team, was conducted. After isolating individual patients fulfilling inclusion criteria, patient investigation documents were requested from relevant GP practices. 40 patients were isolated in total, and data were successfully collected in 60% (n = 24). Data were collected via a proforma. This consisted of patient information, indications for antipsychotic use, and each variable to be monitored. The audit standard used was the recommendations of the 12th Maudsley guidelines. Data were then entered into SPSS and analysed.ResultThe most common reasons for off-label antipsychotic prescribing were Emotionally Unstable Personality disorder (42%, n = 10) and depression (29%, n = 7). Findings demonstrated that 54% (n = 13) of patients audited had ‘basic’ blood screening (FBC, U&E, LFTs), however glucose (38%, n = 9), Prolactin (13%, n = 3), and Creatine Kinase (0%, n = 0), and monitoring was less frequent. 0% (n = 0) were completely monitored as per audit standard.ConclusionPrimary care monitoring of off-label antipsychotics is unsatisfactory, with no patients having a complete set of investigations. Reasons for this are unclear at this stage, however based on initial discussion with GP surgeries, may be due to lack of education regarding screening investigations, patients lost between primary and secondary care services, and a lack of clarity regarding responsibility and designated roles. This audit will be expanded to also include patients from Neighbourhood 2 of the Lewisham Assessment & Liaison team. A more detailed investigation will be conducted into the barriers to physical health screening, such that a targeted intervention can be implanted.