Medical students generally learn to calculate drug doses using paper problems containing numerical information. In contrast, once qualified, they have to extract the relevant information from treatment guidelines and use equipment, such as syringes, to dose patients. We compared students’ success in calculating drug doses using those different approaches. After receiving relevant training, 239 consenting first year students were randomised into four groups. Groups 1 and 2 had to calculate a dose, while groups 3 and 4 had to both calculate and then prepare a dose using a syringe and a labelled bottle of medicine. We gave groups 1 and 3 numerical dosage information. Groups 2 and 4 had to extract this information from guidelines. We compared success between groups using a chi-square test. Groups 1 and 3 outperformed groups 2 and 4. Availability of equipment seemed to be related to the improved success between groups 2 and 4, but this was not significant. Students who did not speak English at home were three times more likely to answer incorrectly than English-speaking students. Students who had equipment were more likely than students who did not have equipment to use appropriate units and propose realistic quantities. In light of these findings, we recommend that medical student training and assessment should include both extraction of embedded dosage information from guidelines and use of the equipment used in dosing.

医学生通常学会使用包含数字信息的纸质问题来计算药物剂量。相反，一旦获得资格，他们必须从治疗指南中提取相关信息，并使用注射器等设备为患者剂量。我们比较了学生使用这些不同方法计算药物剂量的成功率。在接受相关培训后，将239名同意的一年级学生随机分为四组。第1组和第2组必须计算剂量，而第3组和第4组必须同时计算，然后使用注射器和贴有标签的药瓶准备剂量。我们给出了第1组和第3组的数字剂量信息。第2和第4组必须从准则中提取此信息。我们使用卡方检验比较了两组之间的成功率。第1和第3组的表现优于第2和第4组。设备的可用性似乎与第2组和第4组之间成功的改善有关，但这并不重要。在家不说英语的学生错误回答的可能性是说英语的学生的三倍。有设备的学生比没有设备的学生更有可能使用适当的单位并提出实际数量。根据这些发现，我们建议医学生的培训和评估应既包括从指南中提取嵌入式剂量信息，又包括使用剂量中使用的设备。有设备的学生比没有设备的学生更有可能使用适当的单位并提出实际数量。根据这些发现，我们建议医学生的培训和评估应既包括从指南中提取嵌入式剂量信息，又包括使用剂量中使用的设备。有设备的学生比没有设备的学生更有可能使用适当的单位并提出实际数量。根据这些发现，我们建议医学生的培训和评估应既包括从指南中提取嵌入式剂量信息，又包括使用剂量中使用的设备。