Objectives The study sought to evaluate near-peer tutors’ teaching of critical appraisal skills to medical students as an aspect of Evidence-based Medicine. Methods In a randomized crossover trial, 241 students completing a Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-based Medicine (CE-EBM) module in the Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia (FMUI) were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. During tutorial sessions, intervention group participants were assigned to near-peer tutors, who were newly graduated doctors, and those in the control groups were assigned to staff tutors. After two tutorial sessions, intervention and control groups exchanged tutors for the next two sessions. Outcomes were measured using written knowledge and skills multiple choice questions (MCQ) test, the Evidence-based Practice Confidence Scale (EPIC) and a student attitude questionnaire, along with student evaluation of tutors to evaluate the process. Results On completion of the module, the written test scores of intervention group students were similar to those of the control group (t (239) = 1.553, p=0.122), as well as overall Evidence-based Practice Confidence Scale scores (F (2/170) = 0.179, p = 0.673) and attitude scores (t (219) =-0.676, p = 0.085). In the tutor evaluations, the students rated their near-peer tutored sessions as better than those tutored by staff in most respects. Conclusions Near-peer tutors were as effective as and more readily accepted than staff tutors in teaching critical appraisal skills. These findings support the broader implementation of peer-teaching in other areas of medical education.

BackgroundRoutine use of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to prognosticate patients with sepsis is challenged by the requirement to perform numerous laboratory tests. The prognostic accuracy of the quick SOFA (qSOFA) without or with lactate criteria has not been prospectively investigated in low and middle income countries. We assessed the performance of simplified prognosis criteria using qSOFA-lactate criteria in the emergency department of a hospital with limited resources, in comparison with SOFA prognosis criteria and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) screening criteria.MethodsThis prospective cohort study was conducted between March and December 2017 in adult patients with suspected bacterial infection visiting the emergency department of the Indonesian National Referral Hospital. Variables from sepsis prognosis and screening criteria and venous lactate concentration at enrolment were recorded. Patients were followed up until hospital discharge or death. Prognostic accuracy was measured using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of each criterion in the prediction of in-hospital mortality.ResultsOf 3026 patients screened, 1213 met the inclusion criteria. The AUROC of qSOFA-lactate criteria was 0.74 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.77). The AUROC of qSOFA-lactate was not statistically significantly different to the SOFA score (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.78; p=0.462). The qSOFA-lactate was significantly higher than qSOFA (AUROC 0.70, 95% CI0.67 to 0.74; p=0.006) and SIRS criteria (0.57, 95% CI0.54 to 0.60; p<0.001).ConclusionsThe prognostic accuracy of the qSOFA-lactate criteria is as good as the SOFA score in the emergency department of a hospital with limited resources. The performance of the qSOFA criteria is significantly lower than the qSOFA-lactate criteria and SOFA score.This abstract has been translated and adapted from the original English-language content. Translated content is provided on an "as is" basis. Translation accuracy or reliability is not guaranteed or implied. BMJ is not responsible for any errors and omissions arising from translation to the fullest extent permitted by law, BMJ shall not incur any liability, including without limitation, liability for damages, arising from the translated text.

Background: National long-term care development requires updated epidemiological data related to frailty. We aimed to find the prevalence of frailty and its associated factors among Indonesian elderly.Methods: We conducted first-phase cross-sectional analysis of Indonesia Longitudinal Aging Study (INALAS) data collected from community-dwelling outpatients aged 60 years and older without acute illness in nine geriatric service care centres. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted.Results: Among 908 elderly in this study, 15.10% were robust, 66.20% were pre-frail, and 18.70% were frail. Functional dependence was associated with frailty among Indonesian elderly (OR 5.97, 95% CI 4.04–8.80). Being depressed and at risk for malnutrition were also associated with frailty with OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.56–4.12, and OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.68–3.90, respectively. Prior history of fall (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.16–2.72) and hospitalization (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.97–2.20) in the previous 12 months were associated with frailty. There is also significant association between poly pharmacy and frailty (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.50–3.91).Conclusion: Approximately one in five Indonesian community-dwelling elderly was frail. Frailty is associated with functional dependence, being at risk for malnutrition or being malnourished, depression, history of fall, history of hospitalization, and poly pharmacy. There may be bidirectional relationships between the risk factors and frailty. The development of long-term care in Indonesia should be considered, without forcing the elderly who need it.