ABSTRACT
Background
Functional medical disorders (FMDs) refer to persistent physical symptoms that cause impairment or disability, but which cannot be explained by routine medical testing. Negative perceptions towards FMDs exist amongst a variety of healthcare professionals, including medical students. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a course addressing FMDs for medical students in their first year of clinical training, which was integrated within the formal medical school curriculum.
Approach
A multidisciplinary team of eight healthcare professionals delivered seven teaching sessions, each two hours in length, over six weeks. The curriculum was delivered via a combination of didactic teaching, small group tutorials and sessions with simulated patients. Pre- and post-course validated questionnaires assessed knowledge of, attitudes towards and confidence around irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Students undertook a two-station objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), which assessed their ability to take a clinical history from and communicate a diagnosis to simulated patients with IBS and fibromyalgia.
Evaluation
Twenty-seven students completed the pre- and post-course surveys, which demonstrated an increase in knowledge of FMDs at course conclusion (88.89% vs. 57.50%,
p < 0.001). Students' confidence ratings increased in all (100%) domains relating to FMDs: pathophysiology, symptoms, investigations for diagnosis and communicating a diagnosis (
p < 0.001, all analyses). There was a statistically significant improvement in attitude ratings towards FMDs in 11 of 12 (91.7%) questions. All (100%) students passed the OSCE.
Implications
A course integrated within the formal medical school curriculum may be a helpful way to improve knowledge and reduce stigma around FMDs.
Open access
What a two faced agenda
This is a stigma they are systematizing and inculcating early on so no one can see the basics fir what they are as they are told what to see before they see it
I hate the word stigma as it’s a belittling of removing access to life, rights and existing in a constant stream of aggression and blocks at every little moment of our day so that we can’t survive and can’t keep ourselves safe
And this is what this person is selling whilst pretending to those having to do exams in it that it’s ’stigma reduction’ to siphon out the undesirables to never access any real services or get any normal conversation with anyone in any service but be talked at with ‘a special voice and patter’ and pretended to be listened to whilst notes are cherry picked and made up on them. Because their face fits to some description some person somewhere made up on someone they met once and didn’t think much of. So all from a similar demographic should be pushed out of life and community.
Sorry but this is about power and naming a few groups they want to take all rights from
They don’t deserve to even have the details listened to or looked at ‘it’s just a bucket’ and that message oozes through this as a big old agenda. Don’t let them access healthcare whatever they have. Cos they might also have this fictional thing so it’s not worth looking at their blood issue or bad knee. Both of which are worth fixing in wirthybothers.
It’s about rationing all right. But I’m not sure it’s about saving money. And sadly we’ve certain professions and specialties who have gone off the rails and focus on ‘dealing with and proposing how the undesirables should be chosen’ and not medical care or any of the economics to do with it.
They have to sell to the world there are people who are a problem for them in order to make their fortune as the bouncers and jailers etc ‘cheap at any cost’
There is always a line or two in these things that basically suggest a target to gatekeepers along with a description based on nothing medical eg one in ten of your patients and females 16-60yrs old. Then suggesting they make some trauma for their notes.
I cannot believe people are allowed to write such divisive political policies for such groups with no evidence that will affect them life long with no evidence or science first whatsoever, so they getaway with using bigotry as a theory to then prime people’s assessment of such groups. And manufacture answers they want.
That’s what this seems like.
It’s not a medical document it’s a nasty political ideology being implemented by weaponising the weaknesses of/for and power + lack of oversight of this massive industry of healthcare. Which pretends it’s deciding who is true or gets to exist as themselves based on medicine something. But it’s ten seconds judgement when someone enters an establishment having been singled out as prey by these types of targets.
Ps nearly all other workplaces are legally having to focus their training on telling people NOT to bring in these ‘biases’ and to become conscious and aware of their own bigitrues they’ve had mis sold to them.
What sort of profession of professional revels in
instigating this nonsense instead in order to create embedded problems for entire generations?
I hope this acts as paperwork for lawyers to use against these people as evidence of taught systemic isolating and bigotry and removal from access to service ‘by ten second judgement without even looking at their issue’ etc - instead of their clear intentions to try and cover up deliberately baked-in discrimination, bigotry and other failures ‘by pretending it’s evidenced’ and as if it’s always been ok cos look these people we pick on, here’s some made up reasons why they deserve it, and it’s not just one of us that did it so how are you going to prosecute when it’s hard to pinpoint the blame to one person etc
I guess somehow someone is going to one day have to go after ‘all involved’ in certain cases (class action for all those fished out based on x initiatives?) and make sure all get tarred and have penalties - in order that within the profession and systems there starts being moral backstops because professionals are expected to take personal responsibility for the part they choose to play if they choose not to do the right thing instead or at least insist their disagreement is logged in notes if they are ordered to do it anyway.
These systems are trying to be black boxes it feels from listening eg to Maeve’s inquest by pretending it’s all just a mess
but there are papers on these functional things eg from college initiatives that seem to suggest schemes on various wards with designated staff to swoop in and swoop away certain ‘fubctionals’ even if normal staff thought better. So such staff currently operate under that tyranny themselves if they want to do their job morally and wisely instead .
Or sneaky policies that are about excluding minority groups from treatment based on face doesn’t fit papers suggesting they get a different special path etc
Those who put these in place should be able to read science properly so they aren’t being conned by ideologists or if they aren’t then able to make choices not based on science but use fake papers to pretend it is etc. And they should be open to prosecution for it and have to justify it in a court that is also scientifically literate enough to see through this for the bringing in of bigotry that it is.
I don’t know how that is put together but it’s long overdue that there are proper swift ombudsman stopping this crap at source
And it obviously overlaps with further afield policy eg in insurance or other services. But is at class action / policy level yet left for individuals left harmed to fight a defensive system on their own