MANUSCRIPT: Effectiveness of Continuing Medical Education (2007 AHRQ Report)
Results: Of the 68,000 citations identified by literature searching, 136 articles and 9 systematic reviews ultimately met our eligibility criteria. The overall quality of the literature was low and consequently firm conclusions were not possible. Despite this, the literature overall supported the concept that CME was effective, at least to some degree, in achieving and maintaining the objectives studied, including knowledge (22 of 28 studies), attitudes (22 of 26), skills (12 of 15), practice behavior (61 of 105), and clinical practice outcomes (14 of 33). Common themes included that live media was more effective than print, multimedia was more effective than single media interventions, and multiple exposures were more effective than a single exposure. The number of articles that addressed internal and/or external characteristics of CME activities was too small and the studies too heterogeneous to determine if any of these are crucial for CME success. Evidence was limited on the reliability and validity of the tools that have been used to assess CME effectiveness. Based on previous reviews, the evidence indicates that simulation methods in medical education are effective in the dissemination of psychomotor and procedural skills.
http://archive.ahrq.gov/downloads/pub/evidence/pdf/cme/cme.pdf
Written by Brian S McGowan, PhD
Dr. McGowan has served in leadership positions in numerous medical educational organizations and commercial supporters and is a Fellow of the Alliance (FACEhp). He founded the Outcomes Standardization Project, launched and hosted the Alliance Podcast, and most recently launched and hosts the JCEHP Emerging Best Practices in CPD podcast. In 2012 he Co-Founded ArcheMedX, Inc, a healthcare informatics and e-learning company to apply his research in practice.
One Response to “MANUSCRIPT: Effectiveness of Continuing Medical Education (2007 AHRQ Report)”
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
[…] Now, if the assumption is valid, then ‘no harm done’ and we might just as well be content with the efficiency and effectiveness of the existing model of lifelong learning in the health professions. But if the assumption is invalid, well then this one issue (do clinicians really know how to learn) might go a long way to explaining why we continue to hear about a ‘broken and fragmented‘ system of lifelong learning and why CME in particular has been referred to as ‘minimally’ or ‘generally’ effective. […]