The small number of minorities in the field of dentistry is a serious concern.

Funded by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the California Endowment and with student financial aid from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, the primary goal of the Pipeline, Profession, and Practice: Community-Based Dental Education program is to reduce disparities in access to dental care. In a national competition, fifteen dental schools were selected to participate. By the final year (2007) of the five-year project, the schools are expected to achieve three objectives: 1) increase the time (sixty days/year) that senior students and residents spend in patient-centered community clinics and practices treating underserved populations; 2) provide didactic and clinical courses for students and residents that prepare them for their community experiences; and 3) recruit more underrepresented minority and low-income students. The national program office that directs the project is located at Columbia University, and a national advisory committee oversees the program for the sponsoring organizations. The challenge is to demonstrate that the Pipeline objectives are achievable and that the program is sustainable without external support.Dr.

AimsOver the last decade, there have been significant developments in the use of simulation for undergraduate medical education. Despite simulation's diverse applications across the medical school curriculum, it has thus far been underutilised within psychiatry teaching. Psychiatric simulation can support students to develop strategies to elicit psychopathology, de-escalate an aggressive patient or perform a risk assessment. Such experiences can be difficult to encounter during clinical placements and may expose a student or patient to an unacceptable level of risk. We have therefore developed an immersive simulation course that aims to enhance undergraduate psychiatry training.MethodOur course was developed by medical education faculty and psychiatry staff. The course handbook includes storyboards, patient scripts and debrief guidelines. Clinical scenarios are mapped to university intended learning outcomes and include; conducting a risk assessment for a patient with emotionally unstable personality disorder and comorbid depression, managing a manic patient in the Emergency Department and assessing a patient with obsessive-compulsive disorder who has developed skin damage due to hand washing.The one-day course is delivered to groups of 4-8 students from the Universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh during their placements in NHS Lanarkshire. The course takes place in a simulation suite and is facilitated by psychiatrists and medical education faculty. Students each take the lead role during a clinical scenario in which they will encounter a simulated patient. Live video from the simulation is broadcast to other candidates. Scenarios last 10-15 minutes with a 20-30 minute group debrief immediately afterwards. The debrief utilises the PEARLS framework (Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation) and provides the opportunity for peer and facilitator feedback, as well as discussions regarding mental state examination, diagnosis and management.ResultQualitative and quantitative feedback has been collected via an anonymous electronic post-course questionnaire. To date, the course has received universally positive feedback. 93% of candidates rated the overall quality of the course as a learning experience as ‘excellent’. Students reported that the course helped them develop communication skills which they could apply to future clinical situations. In addition, candidates felt participation had increased their confidence in taking a psychiatric history and performing a risk assessment.ConclusionImmersive simulation is an underutilised tool in psychiatry education. Our course complements the existing educational programme of lectures and ward-based teaching and has been positively received. It provides the opportunity for students to develop interview techniques and communication skills in a safe, controlled environment.

AimsThis audit aimed to assess to what extent patients being referred for assessment of memory problems were receiving appropriate screening for reversible causes. We considered the blood tests recommended by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE).BackgroundResearch into ‘reversible dementias’ identified numerous common underlying causes. As a result of this NICE complied comprehensive guidance on investigations which should be performed in the initial stages of assessing patients with memory problems, ideally at a primary care level. These investigations are also crucial at the point of secondary care assessment in order to make a confident diagnosis.MethodDetails of patients referred by their GP to the Older Adult CMHT with memory problems over a one month period were collected. We then used the local laboratory database to note whether each of the eight recommended blood tests had been performed in the preceding 6 months. We measured this against an agreed standard of 95%.After the first cycle of data collection we prepared business-card sized ‘aide memoirs’ for GPs that could serve as a quick reminder. These were sent out to all GPs in the area along with a letter outlining the audit findings.ResultOverall 31 patients were included in the first cycle. 15 patients had all 8 dementia blood screens (48%), 13 (42%) had some of the recommended tests and 3 patients had no screening tests at all (10%). On average patients had 76.6% of the recommended bloods completed. The most commonly completed tests were Full Blood Count (FBC) and Urea & Electrolytes (U&Es), with blood Glucose being the most frequently omitted.In cycle 2, 20 patients were included. Of these patients, 10 had the full complement of screening bloods (50%); 8 had some tests completed (40%) and 2 patients had no screening tests complete (10%). On average 76% of tests were completed. There was an improvement in the rate of completion of both Glucose and Liver Function Tests from cycle1.ConclusionThis audit demonstrated that current practice does not meet the national standard in general. Our intervention produced a modest improvement in the proportion of patients who received a full complement of dementia screening tests, as well as increasing the rate of patients receiving a blood glucose as part of their screening. It would likely be beneficial to consider further intervention and a 3rd audit cycle in due course.