Literature DB >> 7057858

A randomized trial of continuing medical education.

J C Sibley, D L Sackett, V Neufeld, B Gerrard, K V Rudnick, W Fraser.   

Abstract

To determine whether continuing medical education affects the quality of clinical care, we randomly allocated 16 Ontario family physicians to receive or not receive continuing-education packages covering clinical problems commonly confronted in general practice. Over 4500 episodes of care, provided before and after study physicians received continuing education, were compared with preset clinical criteria and classified according to quality. Although objective tests confirmed that the study physicians learned from the packages, there was little effect on the overall quality of care. When the topics were of relatively great interest to the physicians, the control group (who did not receive the packages) showed as much improvement as did the study group. When the topics were not preferred, however, the documented quality of care provided by study physicians rose (P less than 0.05) and differed from that provided by control physicians (P = 0.01). Finally, there was no spillover effect on clinical problems not directly covered by the program. In view of the trend toward mandatory continuing education and the resources expended, it is time to reconsider whether it works.

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7057858     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198203043060904

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  55 in total

Review 1.  Recommendations for future studies: a systematic review of educational interventions in primary care settings.

Authors:  U Freudenstein; A Howe
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Designing trials of interventions to change professional practice in primary care: lessons from an exploratory study of two change strategies.

Authors:  S Rogers; C Humphrey; I Nazareth; S Lister; Z Tomlin; A Haines
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-10

Review 3.  Does continuing medical education in general practice make a difference?

Authors:  P Cantillon; R Jones
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-05-08

4.  Pharmacoeconomics and clinical practice guidelines. A survey of attitudes in Swedish formulary committees.

Authors:  A Anell; P Svarvar
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  The case for knowledge translation: shortening the journey from evidence to effect.

Authors:  Dave Davis; Mike Evans; Alex Jadad; Laure Perrier; Darlyne Rath; David Ryan; Gary Sibbald; Sharon Straus; Susan Rappolt; Maria Wowk; Merrick Zwarenstein
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-07-05

6.  The need for needs assessment in continuing medical education.

Authors:  Geoffrey R Norman; Susan I Shannon; Michael L Marrin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-04-24

7.  Why are clinical problems difficult? General practitioners' opinions concerning 24 clinical problems.

Authors:  H Leclère; M D Beaulieu; G Bordage; A Sindon; M Couillard
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1990-12-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 8.  Implementing guidelines in general practice care.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1992-09

9.  Health education in rheumatology.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 19.103

10.  Continuing medical education for the rheumatologist.

Authors:  D P Symmons
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 19.103

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.