Continuous Professional Development Centered on Learning Needs
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: for some time now, our institution has offered continuing medical education activities to its physicians, but these were never formally evaluated. We set out to assess the current academic program and redesign the educational proposal based on the participants' learning needs (LN).
Development: in 2021, we assessed satisfaction with the current academic program and explored LN using three gathering methods: a survey, focus groups, and a questionnaire. With this data, we designed a new continuing professional development (CPD) proposal that we implemented in 2022 and evaluated at the end of 2022 using a new survey.
Results: in 2021, 90 out of 148 physicians (61%) completed a survey; 16 responded to the questionnaire, and 73 participated in focus groups. Participants mentioned several areas where they would like to receive training and the fundamental skills that make up the family physician's practice. Some activities in the current program were valued and responded well to the LNs, but others received criticism for lack of usefulness and relevance to practice. With this information, for 2022, we designed a new educational proposal suggesting 12 thematic axes with didactic, practice-oriented activities, where each participant chose what to train in. At the end of 2022, 58 out of 148 physicians (39%) responded to the evaluation survey. Most of them found the activities helpful and were motivated to participate by interest in the subject and time availability. There was good participation in the activities, although the workload of the teaching teams also increased as the number of activities increased.
Conclusion: the new proposal provided greater flexibility, accessibility, and autonomy in continuing education and was well-rated. The next challenge is to continue to evaluate how we can maintain the satisfaction and quality of the program without overloading the teaching teams.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Gordon MJ. A review of the validity and accuracy of self-assessments in health professions training. Acad Med. 1991;66(12):762-769. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199112000-00012.
Sargeant J, Borduas F, Sales A, et al. CPD and KT: models used and opportunities for synergy. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2017;37(4):268-273. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000179.
Knowles MS. Self-directed learning: a guide for learners and teachers. Chicago, IL: Follett; 1975.
Schon DA. The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. London: Routledge; 1992. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473.
Fox RD, Bennett NL. Learning and change: implications for continuing medical education. BMJ. 1998;316(7129):466-468. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7129.466.
Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. CanMEDS framework [Internet]. Otawa: the College; 2023 [citado 2023 ago 31]. Disponible en: https://www.royalcollege.ca/ca/en/canmeds/canmeds-framework.html.
Norman GR, Shannon SI, Marrin ML. The need for needs assessment in continuing medical education. BMJ. 2004;328(7446):999-1001. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7446.999.
Grant J. Learning needs assessment: assessing the need. BMJ. 2002;324(7330):156-159. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7330.156.
Coles CR, Grant JG. Curriculum evaluation in medical and health-care education. Med Educ. 1985;19(5):405-422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1985.tb01345.x.
Frye AW, Hemmer PA. Program evaluation models and related theories: AMEE guide no. 67. Med Teach. 2012;34(5):e288-e299. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.668637.
Moore DE Jr, Green JS, Gallis HA. Achieving desired results and improved outcomes: integrating planning and assessment throughout learning activities. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2009;29(1):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.20001.
Kern DE, Thomas PA, Hughes MT. Curriculum development for medical education: a six-step approach. Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2009. 272 p.
Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893-1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8.
Lertrattananon D, Limsawart W, Dellow A, et al. Does medical training in Thailand prepare doctors for work in community hospitals? An analysis of critical incidents. Hum Resour Health. 2019;17(1):62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0399-8.
Flanagan JC. The critical incident technique. Psychol Bull. 1954;51(4):327-358. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061470.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual ResPsychology. 2006;3(2):77-101.
Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, et al. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group. BMJ. 1998;317(7156):465-468. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.317.7156.465.