The assessment of physicians’ knowledge of community-acquired pneumonia basics: KNOCAP study

R. Bontsevich, A. Gavrilova, G. Prozorova, O. Myronenko, T. M. Shagieva, O. Kompaniets, V. Barysheva, G. Ketova, E. Luchinina, E. Miliutina, T. Filinichenko, O. Osipova
{"title":"The assessment of physicians’ knowledge of community-acquired pneumonia basics: KNOCAP study","authors":"R. Bontsevich, A. Gavrilova, G. Prozorova, O. Myronenko, T. M. Shagieva, O. Kompaniets, V. Barysheva, G. Ketova, E. Luchinina, E. Miliutina, T. Filinichenko, O. Osipova","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa1483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To assess physicians’ level of knowledge in clinical picture, diagnosis and treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and its comparison with national clinical standards. Material and Methods: Multicenter research (KNOCAP study) was conducted in Russian and Ukrainian cities Belgorod, Saratov, Dnipro, Voronezh, Chelyabinsk, Tambov, Lipetsk and Kuban’ Region during 2017-2018. We assessed 255 physicians in the knowledge of CAP basics by asking them to complete a questionnaire (14 questions). Results: The average level of correct answers totaled 49.6%, and varied from 39.9% to 58.2% in different centers. The most difficult questions were related to an optimal time for control (repeated) X-ray examination on top of positive dynamics of CAP treatment (20.5% of correct answers), CAP main diagnostic character (38.2%), optimal initial CAP therapy in patients without risk factors (24.9%) and patients with risk factors (17.5%); only 34.9% of the physicians surveyed correctly reported typical mistakes in the treatment of a non-severe CAP. The maximum numbers of correct answers were given on the following questions: postpone reasons for CAP antibiotic therapy (85.8%), the efficiency of pneumococcal and influenza vaccination (82.9%), CAP main pathogens (63.8%) and “inaccurate/ amphibolic” diagnosis of CAP in the absence of X-ray examination (62.6%). Conclusions: The results gained in the survey revealed the insufficient level of physicians’ knowledge in management of patients with CAP. On the one hand, a number of issues need to be considered more carefully, on the other hand, educational activities have to be conducted among physicians of medical and preventive treatment facilities.","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical education, web and internet","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa1483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Objective: To assess physicians’ level of knowledge in clinical picture, diagnosis and treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and its comparison with national clinical standards. Material and Methods: Multicenter research (KNOCAP study) was conducted in Russian and Ukrainian cities Belgorod, Saratov, Dnipro, Voronezh, Chelyabinsk, Tambov, Lipetsk and Kuban’ Region during 2017-2018. We assessed 255 physicians in the knowledge of CAP basics by asking them to complete a questionnaire (14 questions). Results: The average level of correct answers totaled 49.6%, and varied from 39.9% to 58.2% in different centers. The most difficult questions were related to an optimal time for control (repeated) X-ray examination on top of positive dynamics of CAP treatment (20.5% of correct answers), CAP main diagnostic character (38.2%), optimal initial CAP therapy in patients without risk factors (24.9%) and patients with risk factors (17.5%); only 34.9% of the physicians surveyed correctly reported typical mistakes in the treatment of a non-severe CAP. The maximum numbers of correct answers were given on the following questions: postpone reasons for CAP antibiotic therapy (85.8%), the efficiency of pneumococcal and influenza vaccination (82.9%), CAP main pathogens (63.8%) and “inaccurate/ amphibolic” diagnosis of CAP in the absence of X-ray examination (62.6%). Conclusions: The results gained in the survey revealed the insufficient level of physicians’ knowledge in management of patients with CAP. On the one hand, a number of issues need to be considered more carefully, on the other hand, educational activities have to be conducted among physicians of medical and preventive treatment facilities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医生对社区获得性肺炎基本知识的评估:KNOCAP研究
目的:了解临床医师对社区获得性肺炎(CAP)的临床知识、诊治知识及与国家临床标准的比较。材料和方法:多中心研究(KNOCAP研究)于2017-2018年在俄罗斯和乌克兰城市别尔哥罗德、萨拉托夫、第聂伯罗、沃罗涅日、车里雅宾斯克、坦波夫、利佩茨克和库班地区进行。我们通过要求255名医生完成一份问卷(14个问题)来评估他们对CAP基础知识的了解。结果:平均答对率为49.6%,不同中心答对率在39.9% ~ 58.2%之间。最难回答的问题为:在CAP治疗积极动态的基础上进行对照(重复)x线检查的最佳时间(20.5%)、CAP主要诊断特征(38.2%)、无危险因素患者的最佳初始CAP治疗(24.9%)和有危险因素患者的最佳初始CAP治疗(17.5%);仅34.9%的受访医师正确报告了非严重CAP治疗中的典型错误,正确回答最多的是以下问题:延迟CAP抗生素治疗的原因(85.8%)、肺炎球菌和流感疫苗接种的效率(82.9%)、CAP主要病原体(63.8%)和在没有x线检查的情况下对CAP的“不准确/模棱两可”诊断(62.6%)。结论:调查结果显示,医生在CAP患者管理方面的知识水平不足,一方面需要认真考虑一些问题,另一方面需要对医疗和预防治疗机构的医生进行教育活动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The value of a pleural fellowship post Comparison of physicians’ and medical students’ knowledge in the treatment and prevention of COPD according to the final results of the ASCO-II study COPD.Pal: Using a person-based approach to develop a self-management app for people with COPD Children’s interstital lung diseases (chILD) – an area of unmet educational need? Impact of COVID-19 on Tunisian pulmonology trainees
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1