Purpose: Physicians face the challenge of staying current with a rapidly growing body of evidence and applying it to their practice. How emergency physicians (EPs) do so is unknown. The authors sought to describe and assess needs around EP patterns of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and continuing medical education (CME) resource use. Methods: The authors conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional study in 2019 across 12 tertiary care, community, and suburban emergency department (ED) sites in the greater area of Edmonton. Information on EBM/CME resource use along with barriers and facilitators to staying current was gathered using a rigorously developed survey tool, distributed electronically and by mail. Responses were tabulated and subgroups analyzed using MANOVA and ANOVA tests. Thematic analysis of comments used a phenomenological lens. Results: A total of 118 EPs (40.1%) completed the survey. Listening to podcasts, attending EM conferences, and subscription-based resources were preferred for staying current. Resource use differed by years in practice but not by age, sex, training background, or site type. EBM had an important impact on respondents' practice (average rating 3.8 out of 5, with 5 indicating "practice changing"). Time was an important barrier. Most (62.7%) felt that they did not spend enough time, despite spending a median of 4 to 5 h monthly on EBM. Facilitators (including journal club summaries or lists of practice-relevant papers) had only moderate impacts. Thematic analysis found three themes (importance of EBM, implementation challenges, and dissemination of EBM) and 13 subthemes. Conclusion: EPs preferentially chose podcasts, conferences, and subscription-based resources to stay current with EBM; time was the biggest barrier. These findings help ED leads and educators tailor CME to physician learning preferences to maximize application of EBM to clinical practice. The next steps include developing/curating resources and disseminating the survey on a larger scale to identify opportunities for shared virtual resources.
Purpose: Physicians face the challenge of staying current with a rapidly growing body of evidence and applying it to their practice. How emergency physicians (EPs) do so is unknown. The authors sought to describe and assess needs around EP patterns of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and continuing medical education (CME) resource use. Methods: The authors conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional study in 2019 across 12 tertiary care, community, and suburban emergency department (ED) sites in the greater area of Edmonton. Information on EBM/CME resource use along with barriers and facilitators to staying current was gathered using a rigorously developed survey tool, distributed electronically and by mail. Responses were tabulated and subgroups analyzed using MANOVA and ANOVA tests. Thematic analysis of comments used a phenomenological lens. Results: A total of 118 EPs (40.1%) completed the survey. Listening to podcasts, attending EM conferences, and subscription-based resources were preferred for staying current. Resource use differed by years in practice but not by age, sex, training background, or site type. EBM had an important impact on respondents' practice (average rating 3.8 out of 5, with 5 indicating "practice changing"). Time was an important barrier. Most (62.7%) felt that they did not spend enough time, despite spending a median of 4 to 5 h monthly on EBM. Facilitators (including journal club summaries or lists of practice-relevant papers) had only moderate impacts. Thematic analysis found three themes (importance of EBM, implementation challenges, and dissemination of EBM) and 13 subthemes. Conclusion: EPs preferentially chose podcasts, conferences, and subscription-based resources to stay current with EBM; time was the biggest barrier. These findings help ED leads and educators tailor CME to physician learning preferences to maximize application of EBM to clinical practice. The next steps include developing/curating resources and disseminating the survey on a larger scale to identify opportunities for shared virtual resources.
Authors: Karen E A Burns; Mark Duffett; Michelle E Kho; Maureen O Meade; Neill K J Adhikari; Tasnim Sinuff; Deborah J Cook Journal: CMAJ Date: 2008-07-29 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Simone Flynn; Paul Hebert; Deborah Korenstein; Mark Ryan; William B Jordan; Salomeh Keyhani Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Maaike M Rademaker; Adriana L Smit; Marlous F Kortekaas; Peter Paul G van Benthem; Inge Stegeman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 3.240