Teaching ambulatory-care medicine is essential for primary-care education. However, few studies of ambulatory-care training have been done in the past decade. We performed a nationwide survey to examine whether and how ambulatory medicine is taught to medical students and residents. We sent questionnaires to all medical schools (n=80) and accredited teaching hospitals (n=389) in February 2001. The response rates were 83.3% and 79.2%, respectively. Fifty-one (78.5%) of the 65 medical schools provided ambulatory-care education, although the programs varied considerably from school to school. Only 104 teaching hospitals (26.7%) had an ambulatory-care training program.

Although postgraduate training in an ambulatory care setting is recognized as beneficial in Japan, such training has not been widely implemented. In April 2001 we surveyed all 389 accredited teaching hospitals in Japan about their ambulatory care training. We asked 1) whether they provide a postgraduate training program in ambulatory care, particularly for problems commonly encountered in primary care settings, 2) if such a program was provided, how it was organized, and 3) if such a program was not provided, what the reasons were. One hundred eighty physicians responsible for the residency programs of 120 hospitals replied (response rate, 87%). Most residents at these hospitals see patients in outpatient clinics regularly during their training. Many faculty members supervise their residents at the outpatient clinic and also see their own patients. Sixty-eight percent of the respondents did not set teaching objectives for ambulatory care training. Frequently mentioned barriers to providing ambulatory care training were limited space and tight outpatient schedules. To promote postgraduate ambulatory care training in accredited teaching hospitals, adequate resource allocation and a national policy are needed.

Increased emphasis on community-based education in medicine requires close collaboration with and cooperation from general practitioners. This study examined what motivates community physicians to participate in office-based education, to explore the most appropriate method for recognizing physicians' efforts and keeping them motivated with their precepting role. A large majority of respondents to a questionnaire survey thought that the opportunity to learn from their own teaching was an important reward. When the preceptors were asked what support would be most appropriate, a teaching certification plaque, continuing medical education courses, and a title were ranked highest, while financial reward was listed as the least important. Considered most essential by community preceptors were constructive feedback from students, medical-school instructors' understanding of the importance of community-based medicine, and the instructors' enthusiastic promotion of primary-care education.

Background: The aim of this study was to develop the Japanese language version of the Liverpool Care Pathway － Home (LCP－H), and to examine the feasibility of the LCP－H in a pilot study. Methods: LCP－H was administered to cancer patients who were predicted to be in their last few days. We evaluated the achieved care goals of LCP－H. A cross－sectional anonymous questionnaire was administered to home nurses who used LCP－H to evaluate usefulness in using LCP－H. Results: LCP－H was used to 35 patients. The care goals of LCP－H were achieved in almost 80%. The nurses evaluated the usefulness of LCP－H: Providing to continuous end－of－life care each staff, Communication well between home nurses and co－medical home staff, and Education for home nurses with limited experience with end－of－life care. Conclusion: The feasibility of LCP－H was confirmed. Therefore, LCP－H should help home nurses to care for dying patients and their families as guide for end－of－life care in home, and improve the quality of end－of－life care in home. However, because the LCP is now being phased out in the UK, it may be necessary to develop an original education tool to assist in care for dying patients and their families in Japan.

BACKGROUND:Splenectomy in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) is expected to become more common owing to its efficacy on portal hemodynamics. In this report we describe an alarming case of group B streptococcus (GBS) infection after splenectomy in a patient with LC. METHODS:A 72-year-old woman with a history of LC was admitted to our emergency department because of respiratory failure. The patient had received left lateral segmentectomy of the liver and splenectomy three months before admission. Pulmonary examination revealed significant wheezing during inspiration and expiration, but no crackles and stridor. Chest radiography and CT showed no infiltrates. A presumptive diagnosis of bronchial asthma caused by upper respiratory infection was made. Four days after admission, GBS infection was confirmed by blood culture and penicillin G was administered. Antibiotics were given intravenously for a total of 12 days. RESULTS:The patient was discharged on the 12th day after admission. CONCLUSIONS:Although efficacy of splenectomy in patients with LC has been reported, immune status should be evaluated for a longer period. Patients who have undergone splenectomy are highly susceptible to bacteria; moreover, LC itself is an independent risk factor for mortality in patients with sepsis. Since prophylaxis against GBS has not been established, immediate action should be taken. Emergency physicians should be aware of invasive GBS infection in the context of the critical risk factors related to splenectomy and LC, particularly the expected increase of splenectomy performed in LC patients.

Purpose: To examine the feasibility of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS), a comprehensive palliative care scale, for non-cancer patients. Methods: Twenty non-cancer patients and 20 healthcare providers who provide care to the participating patients were asked to complete the IPOS questionnaire, and cognitive interviews were conducted with them. The interviews were analysed using content analysis, a qualitative analysis method. Results: About half to 90% of both patients and healthcare providers answered that they did not find it difficult to answer or understand all items of the IPOS. Therefore, we confirmed its surface validity, and the content validity of the IPOS was confirmed. Conclusion: The surface validity and content validity of the IPOS for non-cancer patients were confirmed, and it became clear that the IPOS can be used as a comprehensive assessment tool for the palliative care of non-cancer patients.