Is it feasible to learn research skills in addition to audit skills through clinical audit? A mixed methods study in general practice.

Background: Involving medical students in research in their undergraduate careers may increase the likelihood that they will be research active after graduation. To date, there has been a paucity of published research of students doing research in general practice.

Aim: The study aims to evaluate the impact of general practice clinical audits on early-stage graduate entry students' audit and research self-efficacy and explore feasibility issues from the student and GP perspective.

Methods: Two student questionnaires (pre- and post-intervention), a qualitative GP survey of the 25 participating GPs and semi-structured interviews of a purposeful sample of GPs were conducted.

Results: Participating students who completed the follow-up survey found that it had a positive educational impact (55%), increased their understanding of the audit cycle (72%) and real-world prescribing (77%). Research confidence wise, there was a statistically significant difference in the student group who completed the audit project compared to those students who did not in knowledge of the audit cycle and the difference between research and audit (p = 0.001) but not in other research skills. Ninety-six percent of responding GPs would be happy for students to do future audits in their practice but some feasibility issues similar to other research initiatives in general practice were identified.

Conclusion: We found this audit initiative feasible and useful in helping students learn about audit skills, patient safety and real-world prescribing. GPs and students would benefit more if it were linked to a substantial clinical placement, focussed on a topic of interest and given protected time. Separate research projects may be needed to develop research skills confidence.