Methods: This is a qualitative study with a phenomenological approach. It starts with a literature review using large databases, followed by interviews with 10 representative experts from medical schools in Indonesia.
Results: Based on the 10 studies retrieved, several components of faculty development were identified as the basis for the model. Ten experts gave input for the model. Components of the model can be grouped into: (i) content, which is materials that need to be delivered; (ii) process components, which depict aspects related to the preparation, execution and evaluation of sustainable faculty development; and (iii) components in the educational system that affect faculty development implementation.
Conclusion: A comprehensive review and development process has likely made this faculty development model suitable for medical schools in Indonesia. Breaking the model into components may help medical schools to prioritise certain aspects related to faculty development programmes.
METHODS: Medical records of patients who were treated for LM in the Paediatric Surgical Centre Universitas Gadjah Mada from January 2015 to January 2019 were reviewed. Scoring systems were used to assess the outcomes, including reduction of size, problems of aesthetics, functional problems, complications, necessity of further interventions, and interventions' frequencies.
RESULTS: During the four-year study, we included 31 children, consisting of 6, 5, and 20 patients in Groups I, II, and III, respectively. The total score did not significantly differ between Groups I, II, and III (14.67±2.80 vs. 13.40±2.07 vs. 12.50±1.47, respectively; p=0.056). Group II scored better in aesthetic problems than other groups (p=0.001), Group III scored higher in necessity of further interventions compared to the other groups (p=0.026), and Group I was higher in interventions' frequencies than the other groups (p<0.001). However, there were no significant differences in reduction of size, functional problems, and complications among groups (p=0.554, 0.151, and 0.076, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant different effect of the three modalities treatment for LM, although one group might have more beneficial effects compared with the other groups due to different scoring system parameters. Further multicentre and prospective cohort studies with a larger number of patients are necessary to establish the existence and extent of our findings.