Online-Fortbildung auf der Basis nationaler Versorgungsleitlinien

Die Fortbildungsplattform leitlinien-wissen.de
  • H. C. Vollmar
  • C.-C. Schürer-Maly
  • M. Lelgemann
  • N. Koneczny
  • M. Koch
  • M. Butzlaff
Leitthema: Ärztliche Aus-, Weiter- und Fortbildung, Teil 2

Zusammenfassung

Die effektive Vermittlung von relevantem Wissen in die klinische Praxis gehört zu den Grundpfeilern eines modernen Gesundheitssystems. Nationale Versorgungsleitlinien (NVL) sollen hierzu einen wesentlichen Beitrag leisten. Um die NVL zu implementieren bzw. den Wissenstransfer zu verbessern, wurde eine E-Learning-Plattform entwickelt, die interaktive Fallgeschichten und Online-CME-Modul1 anbietet. Die Inhalte basieren auf den NVL und werden einem mehrstufigen Begutachtungsverfahren unterzogen, um eine hohe Qualität zu gewährleisten. Die Präsentation im Internet erfolgt mithilfe eines modifizierten Content-Management-Systems. Für den Erhalt einer CME-Teilnahmebescheinigung ist das Ausfüllen eines Online-Feedbackbogens obligat, der eine Evaluation mithilfe einer 4-stufigen Likert-Skala ermöglicht. Von Juni 2003 bis April 2005 wurde dieser Feedbackbogen von 3105 Ärzten beantwortet. 95% gaben ein positives Feedback, die korrespondierenden NVL wurden von 35% genutzt. Dies führte zur Erstellung interaktiver Fallgeschichten als zweitem Lernweg. Eine Kombination aus NVL, interaktiven Fallgeschichten und CME-Modulen kann hilfreich sein, um den Transfer wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse in die Patientenversorgung zu fördern.

Fußnoten
  1. 1.

    CME: Continuing medical education, kontinuierliche ärztliche Fortbildung.

Schlüsselwörter

Leitlinien Nationale Versorgungsleitlinien Continuing medical education (CME) Wissenstransfer E-Learning 

Online continuing medical education based on national disease management guidelines

The e-learning platform leitlinien-wissen.de

Abstract

Effective translation of relevant knowledge into clinical practice is essential for modern health care systems. National Disease Management Guidelines (NDMG) are considered relevant instruments to support this transfer. To implement NDMG Internet-based continuing medical education (CME), modules and online case-based learning objects were designed and published. To ensure high quality the contents are based on NDMG and subjected to multi-step review processes. Presentation on the web was realized through a modified content management system. To obtain a CME certificate, completing an online questionnaire using a four-point Likert scale was mandatory. Between June 2003 and April 2005, 3,105 physicians were registered and used the platform: 95% of the physicians expressed positive feedback in the evaluation questionnaire, and 35% actually used the corresponding NDMG in practice. This prompted the development of interactive medical case-based learning objects as a second learning pathway. An Internet platform for CME including case-based learning objects can be a helpful tool to assure the provision of scientific knowledge for patient care.

Keywords

Clinical practice guideline (CPG) National Disease Management Guidelines (NDMG) Continuing medical education (CME) Knowledge translation E-learning 

Notes

Danksagung

Die Autoren danken dem Qualitätszirkel der hausärztlichen Lehrpraxen für die Teilnahme am Pilottest und für das kritische Feedback.

Interessenkonflikt

Keine Angaben

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Grimshaw J, Thomas R, MacLennan G et al. (2004) Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 8(6)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grol R, Grimshaw J (2003) From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients‘ care. Lancet 362(9391): 1225–1230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lelgemann M, Lang B, Kunz R, Antes G (2005) Clinical guidelines. What do doctors and patients get from them. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 48(2): 215–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harden RM, Grant J, Buckley G, Hart IR (1999) BEME Guide No. 1: Best Evidence Medical Education. Medical Teacher 21(6): 553–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Butzlaff M, Vollmar H, Floer B et al. (2004) Learning with computerized guidelines in general practice? A randomized controlled trial. Fam Pract 21(2): 183–188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davies DA (2005) E-learning. In: Dent JA, Harden RM (eds) A practical guide for medical teachers, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Edinburgh, pp 221–227Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dickmann C, Habermeyer E, Spitzer K (2000) WWW-based continuing medical education: how do general practitioners use it? In: Hasman A (ed) Medical Infobahn for Europe, IOS PressGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wall TC, Huq Mian MA, Ray MN et al. (2005) Improving physician performance through internet-based interventions: who will participate? J Medical Internet Res 7(4): 13Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fischer MR (2003) E-learning in medical education, graduate and continuing medical education. Status and prospects. Med Klin (Munich) 98(10): 594–597Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Casebeer L, Bennett N, Kristofco R et al. (2002) Physician internet medical information seeking and on-line continuing education use patterns. J Contin Educ Health Prof Winter 22(1): 33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Batalden PB, Mohr JJ (1997) Building knowledge of health care as a system. Qual Manag Health Care 5(3): 1–12Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Institute of Medicine (2001) Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. National Academic Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Williamson JW, German PS, Weiss R et al. (1989) 3rd health science information management and continuing education of physicians. A survey of U.S. primary care practitioners and their opinion leaders. Ann Intern Med 110(2): 151–160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA (1997) Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor – Let the reader and viewer beware. Jama 277(15): 1244–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bloom BS (2005) Effects of continuing medical education on improving physician clinical care and patient health: a review of systematic reviews. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 21(3): 380–385PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davis D (1998) Continuing medical education. Global health, global learning. Bmj 316(7128): 385–389PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD, Haynes RB (1995) Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies. Jama 274(9): 700–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cantillon P, Jones R (1999) Does continuing medical education in general practice make a difference? BMJ 318(7193): 1276–1279PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Burrows P (2003) Continuing professional development: filling the gap between learning needs and learning experience. Education Primary Care 14: 411–413Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Charlton R (2001) Continuing professional development (CPD) and training. BMJ Classified 2–3Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Davis D, Evans M, Jadad A et al. (2003) The case for knowledge translation: shortening the journey from evidence to effect. BMJ 327(7405): 33–35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Davis D, Goldman J, Perrier L (2005) Effective continuing professional development. In: Dent JA, Harden RM (eds) A practical guide for medical teachers, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Edinburgh, pp 38–46Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grant J, Chambers E, Jackson G (1999) The good CPD guide. A practical guide to manged CPD. Reed Healthcare Publishing, SuttonGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Towle A (1998) Changes in health care and continuing medical education for the 21st century. BMJ 316(7127): 301–304PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grant J (2002) Learning needs assessment: assessing the need. BMJ 324(7330): 156–159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G et al. (2004) Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess.(6): iii–iv, 1–72Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Grol R (2001) Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Med Care 39 [8 Suppl 2]: II46–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ollenschlaeger G, Kirchner H, Fiene M (2001) Practice guidelines in medicine – validity for clinical application? Internist 42(4): 473–474, 7–83CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bell DS, Fonarow GC, Hays RD, Mangione CM (2000) Self-study from web-based and printed guideline materials. A randomized, controlled trial among resident physicians. Ann Intern Med 132(12): 938–946PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jeannot JG, Scherer F, Pittet V et al. (2003) Use of the world wide web to implement clinical practice guidelines: a feasibility study. J Med Internet Res 5(2): e12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jousimaa J, Makela M, Kunnamo I et al. (2002) Primary care guidelines on consultation practices: the effectiveness of computerized versus paper-based versions. A cluster randomized controlled trial among newly qualified primary care physicians. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 8: 586–596Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Oxman AD, Thomson MA, Davis DA, Haynes RB (1995) No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. CMAJ 153: 1423–1431PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chumley-Jones HS, Dobbie A, Alford CL (2002) Web-based learning: sound educational method or hype? A review of the evaluation literature. Acad Med 77 [Suppl]: S86–93Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fordis M, King JE, Ballantyne CM et al. (2005) Comparison of the instructional efficacy of Internet-based CME with live interactive CME workshops: a randomized controlled trial. Jama 294(9): 1043–1051CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schultze-Mosgau S, Zielinski T, Lochner J (2004) Web-based, virtual course units as a didactic concept for medical teaching. Med Teach 26(4): 336–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    McKimm J, Jollie C, Cantillon P (2003) ABC of learning and teaching: Web based learning. BMJ 326(7394): 870–873CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cook DA, Dupras DM, Thompson WG, Pankratz VS (2005) Web-based learning in residents‘ continuity clinics: a randomized, controlled trial. Acad Med 80: 90–97CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mamary EM, Charles P (2000) On-site to on-line: barriers to the use of computers for continuing education. J Contin Educ Health Prof 20: 171–175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Vollmar HC, Waldmann UM, Gensichen J, Sönnichsen A (2005) E-Learning – Aktueller Stand und Chancen in der Allgemeinmedizin Frankfurt a.M. 8.–9.7. (Kongressbericht). GMS Z Med Ausbild 22Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Butzlaff M, Koneczny N, Floer B et al. (2002) Primary care physicians, internet and new knowledge. Utilization and efficiency of new educational media. Med Klin 97: 383–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Shaffer K, Small JE (2004) Blended learning in medical education: use of an integrated approach with web-based small group modules and didactic instruction for teaching radiologic anatomy. Acad Radiol 11: 1059–1070CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Karnath BM, Das Carlo M, Holden MD (2004) A comparison of faculty-led small group learning in combination with computer-based instruction versus computer-based instruction alone on identifying simulated pulmonary sounds. Teach Learn Med 16: 23–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gold JP, Begg WB, Fullerton D et al. (2004) Successful implementation of a novel internet hybrid surgery curriculum: the early phase outcome of thoracic surgery prerequisite curriculum e-learning project. Ann Surg 240: 499–507; discussion 9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gordon DL, Issenberg SB, Gordon MS et al. (2005) Stroke training of prehospital providers: an example of simulation-enhanced blended learning and evaluation. Med Teach 27: 114–121PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Davis D (2000) Clinical practice guidelines and the translation of knowledge: the science of continuing medical education. CMAJ 163: 1278–1279PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cook DA (2005) The research we still are not doing: an agenda for the study of computer-based learning. Acad Med 80: 541–548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. C. Vollmar
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • C.-C. Schürer-Maly
    • 2
  • M. Lelgemann
    • 4
  • N. Koneczny
    • 2
  • M. Koch
    • 2
  • M. Butzlaff
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Fakultät für MedizinUniversität Witten/HerdeckeWitten
  2. 2.Medizinisches Wissensnetzwerk evidence.de der Universität Witten/Herdecke
  3. 3.Kompetenzzentrum für Allgemeinmedizin und ambulante VersorgungUniversität Witten/HerdeckeWitten
  4. 4.Ärztliches Zentrum für Qualität in der Medizin (ÄZQ)Berlin

Personalised recommendations