The Virtual Medical Centre Review Program: A new model for continuing medical education
description
Transcript of The Virtual Medical Centre Review Program: A new model for continuing medical education
The Virtual Medical Centre Review Program: A new model for continuing medical education
Presented byRoderic Underwood & Pradeep Jayasuriya
to theRoyal Australian College of General Practitioners
49th Annual Scientific Conference 20065th-8th October, Brisbane
Continuing Medical Education
Professor Jordan Cohen (2006) argues that the lecture based format of CME does not change:
• Physician behaviour, or• The health outcomes for patients.
To be effective CME must:• Be self-directed• As interactive as possible• Include relevant learning experiences• Use information of the highest quality
Online Continuing Medical Education
Casebeer et al. (2004) evaluated 30 online CME courses in the US. They found that:
• Quality of content was the most important consideration for participants; and
• Too little interaction was the major source of dissatisfaction.
Virtual Medical Centre
• Allergies• Blood• Bone• Cancer• Cardiac• Endocrine• Gastro• Infection• Men’s Health
• Neurology• Pain• Psychiatry• Renal• Respiratory• Rheumatology• Skin• Women’s Health
Virtual Cancer Centre • Adrenal gland (1) Muscle (4) • Anus (1) Oesophagus (2) • Bladder (3) Other cancers (3) • Blood (4) Ovary (1)• Bone (5) Pancreas (1) • Bone Marrow (7) Penis (2) • Brain (10) Pituitary gland (2) • Breast (6) Prostate (2) • Caecum (1) Skin (3) • Cervix (1) Small Intestine (2) • Colorectal (2) Spinal Cord (5) • Head and Neck (6) Stomach (2) • Kidney (1) Testicle (2) • Liver (2) Thyroid (4) • Lung (7) Uterus (1) • Lymphatic System (15) Vulva (1)
Virtual Medical Centre Review Program
ObjectivesOn completion of the VMC Review Program GPs will:
– Be practiced in communicating medical information to patients and the public; (skill)
– Be familiar with current research in the chosen field of study; (knowledge)
– Be supportive of patients participating in clinical trials; (attitude)
– Implement of best practice procedures for patient care. (behaviour)
Virtual Medical Centre Review Program
• A literature search on your selected topic through the RACGP library;
• A review of ongoing relevant clinical trials; • An audit on patients you have treated; • To prepare a hypothetical case study; and • Review the VMC content on your chosen topic.
VMC Review ProgramA Process Evaluation
Strengths• GPs have the opportunity to select a topic of
professional interest.• GPs are able to interact with a colleague on a one-to-
basis.• GPs are able to complete the activity in their own
convenience.• GPs receive public recognition for their contribution.• Quality of the information held by the VMC.
VMC Review ProgramA Process Evaluation
Challenges• GPs familiarity with e-learning.• Preparation of physicians to act as facilitators.• Compatibility of IT equipment.
VMC Review ProgramA Process Evaluation
Opportunities• To enhance CME opportunities for rural GPs.• To facilitate inter-professional education, e.g. pharmacy,
nursing and allied health professions.• To apply the learning model to other areas, e.g. the
medical devices industry.• To provide CME to GPs in developing countries.
VMC Review ProgramA Process Evaluation
Concerns• Maintaining currency of information.• Maintaining a “technological edge”.• Competition from other e-learning providers.
VMC Review Program
Conclusion
The VMC Review Program is:• A self-directed CME program• An interactive CME program• A relevant CME program
VMC Review Program
ReferencesCantillon, P. & Jones, R. Does continuing medical
education in general practice make a difference? British Medical Journal, May 8, 1999.
Casebeer L, Kristofco RE, Strasser S, Reilly M,Krishnamoorthy P, Rabin A, Zheng S, Karp S, Myers L. Standardizing evaluation of on-line continuing medical education: physician knowledge, attitudes, and reflection on practice. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2004 Spring;24(2):68-75.
Cohen, Jordan. A New Vision for Continuing Medical Education. Medscape General Medicine, 2006, 8(1): 80.