Journal of Cancer Education

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 591–596

Assessing the Effectiveness of a Grand Rounds CME Activity for Health-Care Professionals

  • Terry Ann Glauser
  • P. Holder Nevins
  • J. Chad Williamson
  • Brian Tomlinson
Article

Abstract

The Lymphoma Research Foundation offers Grand Rounds continuing medical education (CME) activities on specific issues related to advances in the management of patients with lymphoma. The 2012 activity comprised interactive case studies presented by local lymphoma experts. A case-based survey was designed to assess whether the management choices of program participants are consistent with the evidence-based content of the CME activity. This survey was administered to participants 1 month after completion of the CME activity and also to a control group who did not participate in the educational program. Participants were more aware of the epidemiology of CD20-positive tumors than were controls and were more likely to appropriately diagnose primary mediastinal large B cell lymphoma (PMBCL), use evidence-based second-line therapy for PMBCL, and properly manage a patient with classic Hodgkin lymphoma that did not respond to standard therapy. Participants were also more confident than controls in their ability to interpret histology and cytogenetic testing for selecting an optimal treatment.

Keywords

Case vignette Survey Lymphoma 

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A (2012) Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 62:10–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P et al (2000) Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: a prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. JAMA 283:1715–1722PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P et al (2004) Measuring the quality of physician practice by using clinical vignettes: a prospective validation study. Ann Intern Med 141:771–780PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohen J (1998) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, HilldaleGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD et al (1995) Changing physician performance: a systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies. JAMA 274(9):700–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marinopoulos SS, Dorman T, Ratanawongsa N, et al. Effectiveness of continuing medical education. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 149 (Prepared by the Johns Hopkins Evidence-based Practice Center, under contract no. 290-02-0018.) AHRQ publication no. 07-E006. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith AJ, Law CH, Khalifa MA et al (2003) Multimodal CME for surgeons and pathologists improves colon cancer staging. J Cancer Educ 18(2):81–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leong CN, Shakespeare TP, Mukherjee RK et al (2006) Efficacy of an integrated continuing medical education (CME) and quality improvement (QI) program on radiation oncologist (RO) clinical practice. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66(5):1457–1460PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Watson E, Clements A, Yudkin P et al (2001) Evaluation of the impact of two educational interventions on GP management of familial breast/ovarian cancer cases: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Br J Gen Pract 51(471):817–821PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Petty JK, Vetto JT (2002) Beyond doughnuts: tumor board recommendations influence patient care. J Cancer Educ 17(2):97–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gatcliffe TA, Coleman RL (2008) Tumor board: more than treatment planning—a 1-year prospective survey. J Cancer Educ 23(4):235–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Braithwaite D, Elery J, de Lusignan S et al (2003) Using the Internet to conduct surveys of health professionals: a valid alternative? Fam Pract 20:545–551PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2012) NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: Hodgkin lymphoma. V2. www.nccn.org. Accessed 15 May 2012
  14. 14.
    Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al (2007) Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25(5):579–586PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Diehl V, Franklin J, Pfreundschuh M et al (2003) Standard and increased-dose BEACOPP chemotherapy compared with COPP-ABVD for advanced Hodgkin’s disease. N Engl J Med 348(24):2386–2395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gallamini A, Patti C, Viviani S et al (2011) Early chemotherapy intensification with BEACOPP in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma patients with an interim-PET positive after two ABVD courses. Br J Haematol 152(5):551–560PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schmitz N, Pfistner B, Sextro M et al (2002) Aggressive conventional chemotherapy compared with high-dose chemotherapy with autologous haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation for relapsed chemosensitive Hodgkin’s disease; a randomised trial. Lancet 359(9323):2065–2071PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mantovani A (2011) B cells and macrophages in cancer: yin and yang. Nat Med 17(3):285–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Steidl C, Gascoyne RD (2011) The molecular pathogenesis of primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma. Blood 118(10):2659–2669PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vassilakopoulos TP, Pangalis GA, Katsigiannis A et al (2012) Rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone with or without radiotherapy in primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma: the emerging standard of care. Oncologist 17(2):239–249PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sparano JA, Wiernik PH, Leaf A, Dutcher JP (1993) Infusional cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide in relapsed and resistant non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: evidence for a schedule-dependent effect favoring infusional administration of chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 11(6):1071–1078PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gutierrez M, Chabner BA, Pearson D et al (2000) Role of a doxorubicin-containing regimen in relapsed and resistant lymphomas: an 8-year follow-up study of EPOCH. J Clin Oncol 18(21):3633–3642PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Velasquez WS, CAbanillas F, Salvador P et al (1988) Effective salvage therapy for lymphoma with cisplatin in combination with high-dose Ara-C and dexamethasone (DHAP). Blood 71(1):117–122PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Velasquez WS, McLaughlin P, Tucker S et al (1994) ESHAP—an effective chemotherapy regimen in refractory and relapsing lymphoma: a 4-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol 12(6):1169–1176Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moskowitz CH, Bertino JR, Glassman JR et al (1999) Ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide: a highly effective cytoreduction and peripheral-blood progenitor-cell mobilization regimen for transplant-eligible patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 17(12):3776–3785PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vose J, Sneller V (2003) Outpatient regimen rituximab plus ifosfamide, carboplatin an detoposide (R-ICE) for relapsed non-Hodgkins’ lymphoma. Ann Oncol 14(suppl 1):17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dimopoulos MA, Gertz MS, Kastritis E et al (2009) Update on treatment recommendations from the Fourth International Workshop on Waldenstrom’s Macroglobulinemia. J Clin Oncol 27(1):120–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Terry Ann Glauser
    • 1
  • P. Holder Nevins
    • 1
  • J. Chad Williamson
    • 1
  • Brian Tomlinson
    • 2
  1. 1.CE Outcomes, LLCBirminghamUSA
  2. 2.Lymphoma Research FoundationNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations