Continuing professional education for general practitioners on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: feasibility of a blended learning approach in Bangladesh.
Attitude of Health Personnel
Bangladesh
/ epidemiology
Betacoronavirus
COVID-19
Communicable Disease Control
/ methods
Computer-Assisted Instruction
Coronavirus Infections
/ epidemiology
Education, Distance
/ methods
Education, Medical, Continuing
/ organization & administration
Feasibility Studies
General Practitioners
/ education
Humans
Models, Educational
Needs Assessment
Pandemics
/ prevention & control
Pneumonia, Viral
/ epidemiology
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
/ epidemiology
Quality Improvement
SARS-CoV-2
Teaching
/ standards
Blended learning
COPD
Continuing medical education
GP
Mixed-methods feasibility study
Post-graduate training
Primary care
Journal
BMC family practice
ISSN: 1471-2296
Titre abrégé: BMC Fam Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967792
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 09 2020
28 09 2020
Historique:
received:
08
06
2020
accepted:
14
09
2020
entrez:
29
9
2020
pubmed:
30
9
2020
medline:
21
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Continuing medical education (CME) is essential to developing and maintaining high quality primary care. Traditionally, CME is delivered face-to-face, but due to geographical distances, and pressure of work in Bangladesh, general practitioners (GPs) are unable to relocate for several days to attend training. Using chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as an exemplar, we aimed to assess the feasibility of blended learning (combination of face-to-face and online) for GPs, and explore trainees' and trainers' perspectives towards the blended learning approach. We used a mixed-methods design. We trained 49 GPs in two groups via blended (n = 25) and traditional face-to-face approach (n = 24) and assessed their post-course knowledge and skills. The COPD Physician Practice Assessment Questionnaire (COPD-PPAQ) was administered before and one-month post-course. Verbatim transcriptions of focus group discussions with 18 course attendees and interviews with three course trainers were translated into English and analysed thematically. Forty GPs completed the course (Blended: 19; Traditional: 21). The knowledge and skills post course, and the improvement in self-reported adherence to COPD guidelines was similar in both groups. Most participants preferred blended learning as it was more convenient than taking time out of their busy work life, and for many the online learning optimised the benefits of the subsequent face-to-face sessions. Suggested improvements included online interactivity with tutors, improved user friendliness of the e-learning platform, and timing face-to-face classes over weekends to avoid time-out of practice. Quality improvement requires a multifaceted approach, but adequate knowledge and skills are core components. Blended learning is feasible and, with a few caveats, is an acceptable option to GPs in Bangladesh. This is timely, given that online learning with limited face-to-face contact is likely to become the norm in the on-going COVID-19 pandemic.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Continuing medical education (CME) is essential to developing and maintaining high quality primary care. Traditionally, CME is delivered face-to-face, but due to geographical distances, and pressure of work in Bangladesh, general practitioners (GPs) are unable to relocate for several days to attend training. Using chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as an exemplar, we aimed to assess the feasibility of blended learning (combination of face-to-face and online) for GPs, and explore trainees' and trainers' perspectives towards the blended learning approach.
METHODS
We used a mixed-methods design. We trained 49 GPs in two groups via blended (n = 25) and traditional face-to-face approach (n = 24) and assessed their post-course knowledge and skills. The COPD Physician Practice Assessment Questionnaire (COPD-PPAQ) was administered before and one-month post-course. Verbatim transcriptions of focus group discussions with 18 course attendees and interviews with three course trainers were translated into English and analysed thematically.
RESULTS
Forty GPs completed the course (Blended: 19; Traditional: 21). The knowledge and skills post course, and the improvement in self-reported adherence to COPD guidelines was similar in both groups. Most participants preferred blended learning as it was more convenient than taking time out of their busy work life, and for many the online learning optimised the benefits of the subsequent face-to-face sessions. Suggested improvements included online interactivity with tutors, improved user friendliness of the e-learning platform, and timing face-to-face classes over weekends to avoid time-out of practice.
CONCLUSIONS
Quality improvement requires a multifaceted approach, but adequate knowledge and skills are core components. Blended learning is feasible and, with a few caveats, is an acceptable option to GPs in Bangladesh. This is timely, given that online learning with limited face-to-face contact is likely to become the norm in the on-going COVID-19 pandemic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32988371
doi: 10.1186/s12875-020-01270-2
pii: 10.1186/s12875-020-01270-2
pmc: PMC7521769
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
203Subventions
Organisme : NIHR Global Respiratory Health (RESPIRE) Unit
ID : 16/136/109
Pays : International
Investigateurs
Harry Campbell
(H)
Steve Cunningham
(S)
Monica Fletcher
(M)
Liz Grant
(L)
Sanjay Juvekar
(S)
Wong Ping Lee
(WP)
Andrew Morris
(A)
Saturnino Luz
(S)
Hana Mahmood
(H)
Aziz Sheikh
(A)
Colin Simpson
(C)
Sajid Bashir Soofi
(SB)
Osman Yusuf
(O)
Références
Fam Med. 2016 Mar;48(3):194-202
pubmed: 26950908
Prim Care Respir J. 2014 Mar;23(1):38-45
pubmed: 24346825
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Aug 29;18(1):206
pubmed: 30157829
BMC Med Educ. 2009 Jun 10;9:33
pubmed: 19515243
Respir Med. 2011 Jan;105(1):8-14
pubmed: 20797841
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007 Sep 15;176(6):532-55
pubmed: 17507545
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Aug 20;13:104
pubmed: 23961782
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2005 Winter;25(1):43-51
pubmed: 16078802
Multidiscip Respir Med. 2019 Sep 9;14:28
pubmed: 31516702
PLoS Med. 2006 Nov;3(11):e442
pubmed: 17132052
Matern Child Health J. 2013 Nov;17(9):1725-34
pubmed: 23291875
Hum Resour Health. 2011 Jan 22;9:3
pubmed: 21255446
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Apr 01;15:63
pubmed: 25879809
Cureus. 2018 Mar 22;10(3):e2357
pubmed: 29805926
Multidiscip Respir Med. 2013 Mar 19;8(1):24
pubmed: 23509969
Prim Care Respir J. 2010 Jun;19 Suppl 1:S1-20
pubmed: 20514388
BMC Fam Pract. 2019 Oct 20;20(1):139
pubmed: 31630674
Breathe (Sheff). 2019 Mar;15(1):24-35
pubmed: 30838057
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Jul 30;19(1):289
pubmed: 31362735
BMC Med Educ. 2010 Jan 26;10:6
pubmed: 20100354
Cureus. 2018 Dec 31;10(12):e3808
pubmed: 30868022
Respir Med. 2006 Feb;100(2):264-72
pubmed: 15975774
Am J Occup Ther. 2013 Mar-Apr;67(2):171-6
pubmed: 23433271
Educ Prim Care. 2016 May;27(3):217-24
pubmed: 27012724
Med Educ. 2006 Jun;40(6):568-75
pubmed: 16700773
Med Teach. 2012;34(4):e216-21
pubmed: 22455712
Med Teach. 2008 Jun;30(5):455-73
pubmed: 18576185
Am J Pharm Educ. 2010 Jun 15;74(5):
pubmed: 20798797
Scand J Prim Health Care. 2019 Dec;37(4):459-467
pubmed: 31694439