E-learning Interventions for Quality Improvement Continuing Medical Education-A Scoping Review.

IF 1.6 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1097/CEH.0000000000000564
Michael J Roth, Lauren A Maggio, Joseph A Costello, Anita Samuel
{"title":"E-learning Interventions for Quality Improvement Continuing Medical Education-A Scoping Review.","authors":"Michael J Roth, Lauren A Maggio, Joseph A Costello, Anita Samuel","doi":"10.1097/CEH.0000000000000564","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Improving health care quality and patient safety are top priorities for the medical field. Robust continuing medical education (CME) programs represent major interventions to effectively teach quality improvement (QI) principles to practicing physicians. In particular, eLearning, a term describing online and distance learning interventions using digital tools, provides a means for CME interventions to reach broader audiences. Although there has been a focus on CME addressing QI, no knowledge synthesis has focused specifically on eLearning interventions. The purpose of this review was to examine the current landscape of eLearning interventions in QI-focused CME.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a scoping review using the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley as revised by Levac. We searched five databases and identified 2467 prospective publications, which two authors independently screened for inclusion. From each included article, two authors independently extracted data on the instructional modalities and QI tools used and met regularly to achieve consensus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one studies were included. Most studies used blended instruction (n = 12) rather than solely eLearning interventions. Salient findings included the importance of coaching from QI experts and institutional support for planning and implementing eLearning interventions. Lack of protected time and resources for participants were identified as barriers to participation in CME activities, with small practices being disproportionately affected.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Partnerships between CME developers and sponsoring organizations are vital in creating sustainable eLearning interventions for QI-focused CME. Remote coaching can be an effective strategy to provide ongoing support to geographically separated learners.</p>","PeriodicalId":50218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000564","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Improving health care quality and patient safety are top priorities for the medical field. Robust continuing medical education (CME) programs represent major interventions to effectively teach quality improvement (QI) principles to practicing physicians. In particular, eLearning, a term describing online and distance learning interventions using digital tools, provides a means for CME interventions to reach broader audiences. Although there has been a focus on CME addressing QI, no knowledge synthesis has focused specifically on eLearning interventions. The purpose of this review was to examine the current landscape of eLearning interventions in QI-focused CME.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review using the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley as revised by Levac. We searched five databases and identified 2467 prospective publications, which two authors independently screened for inclusion. From each included article, two authors independently extracted data on the instructional modalities and QI tools used and met regularly to achieve consensus.

Results: Twenty-one studies were included. Most studies used blended instruction (n = 12) rather than solely eLearning interventions. Salient findings included the importance of coaching from QI experts and institutional support for planning and implementing eLearning interventions. Lack of protected time and resources for participants were identified as barriers to participation in CME activities, with small practices being disproportionately affected.

Discussion: Partnerships between CME developers and sponsoring organizations are vital in creating sustainable eLearning interventions for QI-focused CME. Remote coaching can be an effective strategy to provide ongoing support to geographically separated learners.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于提高继续医学教育质量的电子学习干预措施--范围综述。
介绍:提高医疗质量和患者安全是医疗领域的首要任务。强有力的继续医学教育(CME)项目是向执业医师有效传授质量改进(QI)原则的主要干预措施。特别是电子学习(eLearning)--一个描述使用数字工具进行在线和远程学习干预的术语--为继续医学教育干预提供了一种使更多受众受益的手段。尽管人们一直在关注针对质量改进的继续医学教育,但还没有专门针对电子学习干预的知识综述。本综述的目的是研究以质量为导向的继续医学教育中电子学习干预措施的现状:我们使用 Arksey 和 O'Malley 制定并经 Levac 修订的框架进行了范围界定综述。我们检索了五个数据库,确定了 2467 篇前瞻性出版物,并由两位作者独立筛选是否纳入这些出版物。从每篇纳入的文章中,两位作者独立提取了所使用的教学模式和 QI 工具的数据,并定期举行会议以达成共识:结果:共纳入 21 项研究。大多数研究使用了混合教学(n = 12),而非单纯的电子学习干预。突出的发现包括:QI 专家的指导和机构的支持对于规划和实施电子学习干预措施非常重要。参与者缺乏受保护的时间和资源被认为是参与继续医学教育活动的障碍,小型医疗机构受到的影响尤为严重:讨论:继续医学教育开发者和赞助机构之间的合作对于为注重质量与创新的继续医学教育创建可持续的电子学习干预措施至关重要。远程辅导可以作为一种有效的策略,为地理位置不同的学员提供持续支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
85
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Continuing Education is a quarterly journal publishing articles relevant to theory, practice, and policy development for continuing education in the health sciences. The journal presents original research and essays on subjects involving the lifelong learning of professionals, with a focus on continuous quality improvement, competency assessment, and knowledge translation. It provides thoughtful advice to those who develop, conduct, and evaluate continuing education programs.
期刊最新文献
Differences in Physician Performance and Self-rated Confidence on High- and Low-Stakes Knowledge Assessments in Board Certification. Paving the Way Forward for Evidence-Based Continuing Professional Development. Development of a Communication Skills Training to Enhance Effective Team Communication in Oncology. Evolution of a Continuing Professional Development Program Based on a Community of Practice Model for Health Care Professionals in Resource-Limited Settings. Where do Physiotherapists Search for Information? Barriers in Translating Scientific Information into Clinical Practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1