Table 3 Characteristics and formal training in end-of-life care among doctors (N = 390)
Characteristics | No. (%) |
|---|---|
Current position | |
Senior house officer* | 228 (58.5%) |
Registrar/resident | 66 (16.9%) |
Senior registrar/chief resident | 24 (6.2%) |
Consultant | 72 (18.5%) |
Males | 226 (57.9%) |
Have ever worked in an ICU setting | 122 (31.3%) |
Had undergraduate training in EOL care (n = 390) | |
Lectures | 213 (54.6%) |
Small group discussions | 114 (29.2%) |
Role play | 57 (14.6%) |
One or more of the above methods | 256 (65.6%) |
Had in-service/postgraduate training in EOL care (n = 390) | |
Lectures | 69 (17.7%) |
Small group discussions | 47 (12.1%) |
Role play | 25 (6.4%) |
Formal training sessions during overseas training | 10 (2.6%) |
Local workshops/postgraduate course work | 3 (0.8%) |
One or more of the above methods | 107 (27.4%) |
Either undergraduate or postgraduate or both | 297 (76.2%) |
EOL training perceived as adequate | |
Yes | 123 (31.5%) |
No | 178 (45.6%) |
Not certain | 89 (22.8%) |
Most preferred training method on managing EOL issues | |
Lectures | 49 (12.6%) |
Small group discussions | 98 (25.1%) |
Role play | 107 (27.4%) |
Workshops/demonstrations | 24 (6.2%) |
Clinical exposure/experience | 31 (7.9%) |
Not certain | 81 (20.8%) |