Loading…

Effectiveness of traditional lectures and case methods in Swedish general practitioners’ continuing medical education about COPD: a cluster randomised controlled trial

ObjectivesTo study the effects of continuing medical education (CME) about chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) for general practitioners (GPs) by comparing two commonly used CME methods with each other and no CME (reference group).DesignA pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:BMJ open 2018-08, Vol.8 (8), p.e021982-e021982
Main Authors: Sandelowsky, Hanna, Krakau, Ingvar, Modin, Sonja, Ställberg, Björn, Johansson, Sven-Erik, Nager, Anna
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:ObjectivesTo study the effects of continuing medical education (CME) about chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) for general practitioners (GPs) by comparing two commonly used CME methods with each other and no CME (reference group).DesignA pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with primary healthcare centres (PHCCs) as units of randomisation.Setting, participants and interventions24 PHCCs in Stockholm County, Sweden, were randomised into two CME intervention arms: case method learning (CM) (n=12) and traditional lectures (TL) (n=12). A reference group without CME (n=11) was recruited separately. GPs (n=255) participated in the study arm to which their PHCC was allocated: CM, n=87; TL, n=93; and reference, n=75. Two 2-hour CME seminars were given in a period of 3 months.Primary outcome measuresChanges in scores between baseline and 12 months on a 13-item questionnaire about evidence-based COPD management (0–2 points/question, maximum total score 26 points).Results133 (52%) GPs completed the questionnaire both at baseline and 12 months. Both CM and TL resulted in small yet significantly higher total scores at 12 months than at baseline (CM, 10.34 vs 11.44; TL, 10.21 vs 10.91; p
ISSN:2044-6055
2044-6055
DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021982