Evaluation of an online Diabetes Needs Assessment Tool (DNAT) for health professionals: a randomised controlled trial

Background: Continuous medical education is traditionally reliant to a large extent on self-directed learning based on individuals' perceived learning priorities. Evidence suggests that this ability to self-assess is limited, and more so in the least competent. Therefore, it may be of benefit to utilise some form of external assessment for this purpose. Many diabetes educational programmes have been introduced, but few have been assessed for their benefit in a systematic manner. As diabetes is an increasingly prevalent disease, methods for the dissemination and understanding of clinical guidelines need to be explored for their effectiveness. This paper describes the study design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of using an interactive online Diabetes Needs Assessment Tool (DNAT), that builds a learning curriculum based on identified knowledge gaps, compared with conventional self-directed learning. The study assesses the effect of these interventions on health professionals' knowledge of diabetes management, evaluates the acceptability of this process of learning and self-reported changes in clinical practice as a result of this novel educational process. Methods: Following a baseline assessment, participants will be randomised to undergo a 4-month learning period where they will either be given access to the diabetes learning modules alone (control group) or a Diabetes Needs Assessment Tool (DNAT) plus the diabetes learning modules (intervention group). On completion of the DNAT, a personalised learning report will be created for each participant identifying needs alongside individualised recommendations of the most appropriate learning modules to meet those requirements. All participants will complete a Diabetes Knowledge Test before and immediately after the allocated learning and the primary outcome will be the state of knowledge at 4 months. Learners will also be surveyed immediately after the learning period to assess the acceptability of the learning formats and the perceived usefulness and usability of the materials. After a further month, all learners will receive a series of questions to evaluate self-reported changes in clinical practice as a result of this educational experience and asked to include specific examples of any changes in their diabetes care practice

Diffusion of an e-learning programme among Danish General Practitioners: A nation-wide prospective survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We were unable to identify studies that have considered the diffusion of an e-learning programme among a large population of general practitioners. The aim of this study was to investigate the uptake of an e-learning programme introduced to General Practitioners as part of a nation-wide disseminated dementia guideline.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective study among all 3632 Danish GPs. The GPs were followed from the launching of the e-learning programme in November 2006 and 6 months forward. Main outcome measures: Use of the e-learning programme. A logistic regression model (GEE) was used to identify predictors for use of the e-learning programme.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In the study period, a total of 192 different GPs (5.3%) were identified as users, and 17% (32) had at least one re-logon. Among responders at first login most have learnt about the e-learning programme from written material (41%) or from the internet (44%). A total of 94% of the users described their ability of conducting a diagnostic evaluation as good or excellent. Most of the respondents used the e-learning programme due to general interest (90%). Predictors for using the e-learning programme were Males (OR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.1; 2.0) and members of Danish College of General Practice (OR = 2.2, 95% CI 1.5; 3.1), whereas age, experience and working place did not seem to be influential.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Only few Danish GPs used the e-learning programme in the first 6 months after the launching. Those using it were more often males and members of Danish College of General Practice. Based on this study we conclude, that an active implementation is needed, also when considering electronic formats of CME like e-learning.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00392483.</p

Evaluation of an online interactive Diabetes Needs Assessment Tool (DNAT) versus online self-directed learning: a randomised controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Methods for the dissemination, understanding and implementation of clinical guidelines need to be examined for their effectiveness to help doctors integrate guidelines into practice. The objective of this randomised controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of an interactive online Diabetes Needs Assessment Tool (DNAT) (which constructs an e-learning curriculum based on individually identified knowledge gaps), compared with self-directed e-learning of diabetes guidelines.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Health professionals were randomised to a 4-month learning period and either given access to diabetes learning modules alone (control group) or DNAT plus learning modules (intervention group). Participants completed knowledge tests before and after learning (primary outcome), and surveys to assess the acceptability of the learning and changes to clinical practice (secondary outcomes).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Sixty four percent (677/1054) of participants completed both knowledge tests. The proportion of nurses (5.4%) was too small for meaningful analysis so they were excluded. For the 650 doctors completing both tests, mean (SD) knowledge scores increased from 47.4% (12.6) to 66.8% (11.5) [intervention group (n = 321, 64%)] and 47.3% (12.9) to 67.8% (10.8) [control group (n = 329, 66%)], (ANCOVA p = 0.186). Both groups were satisfied with the usability and usefulness of the learning materials. Seventy seven percent (218/284) of the intervention group reported combining the DNAT with the recommended reading materials was "<it>very useful"/"useful"</it>. The majority in both groups (184/287, 64.1% intervention group and 206/299, 68.9% control group) [95% CI for the difference (-2.8 to 12.4)] reported integrating the learning into their clinical practice.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Both groups experienced a similar and significant improvement in knowledge. The learning materials were acceptable and participants incorporated the acquired knowledge into practice.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ISRCTN: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN67215088">ISRCTN67215088</a></p

E-learning to improve the drug prescribing in the hospitalized elderly patients: the ELICADHE feasibility pilot study

E-learning is an efficient and cost-effective educational method