Health technology assessment of online eLearning for post-registration health professionals’ education

Aim: The overall aim of this thesis was to undertake and report the findings of a health technology assessment (HTA) on the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of online and LAN-based eLearning, and blended learning, among post-registration healthcare professionals. Methods: This HTA comprised three studies. The first study was a systematic review of 93 randomised controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of online and LAN-based eLearning on physicians' knowledge, skills, attitude and satisfaction. The second study compared the cost, cost-savings and return on investment between a blended and a face-to-face advanced cardiac life support course for physicians in Singapore. The third study was an online survey that assessed the acceptability of the technology among a sample of optometrists and opticians in Singapore and their scope of practice, primary eye care knowledge, views on extended roles in primary eye care, preferred mode of learning for continuing professional education, and referral behaviour. Results: The systematic review showed that online and LAN-based eLearning or blended learning compared with self-directed or face-to-face learning resulted in higher post-intervention knowledge scores (21 studies; small to large effect size; very poor quality); higher post-intervention skills scores (seven studies; large effect size; low quality); higher attitude scores (one study; very low quality); higher post-intervention satisfaction (four studies; large effect size; low quality); and higher post-intervention practice or behaviour changes (eight studies; large effect size; low quality) among physicians in the intervention groups. Fourteen studies compared eLearning with other forms of eLearning. Among these, four studies reported higher post-intervention knowledge scores (large effect size; very low quality) for participants in the intervention group. Unintended or adverse effects of the intervention were not reported among the included studies. Ninety-three studies (N=16,895) were included of which seventy-six studies compared ODE (including blended) vs self-directed/face-to-face learning. Overall the effect of ODE (including blended) on post-intervention knowledge, skills, attitude, satisfaction, practice or behaviour change and patient outcomes was inconsistent and ranged mostly from no difference between the groups to higher post-intervention score in the intervention group (small to large effect size, very low to low quality evidence). Twenty-one studies reported higher knowledge score (small to large effect size; very low quality) for the intervention while 20 studies reported no difference in knowledge between the groups. Seven studies reported higher skill score in the intervention (large effect size; low quality) while thirteen studies reported no difference in skill score between the groups. One study reported higher attitude score for the intervention (very low quality), while 4 studies reported no difference in attitude score between the groups. Four studies reported higher post-intervention physician satisfaction with the intervention (large effect size; low quality), while six studies reported no difference in satisfaction between the groups. Eight studies reported higher post-intervention practice or behaviour change for the ODE group (small to moderate effect size; low quality) while five studies reported no difference in practice or behaviour change between the groups. One study reported higher improvement in patient outcome, while three others reported no difference in patient outcome between the groups. None of the included studies reported any unintended/adverse effects, cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Although the review only focused on post-registration medical doctors, the technology could be used for the interprofessional education of post-registration medical doctors and other healthcare professionals. Such an initiative would encourage collaborative learning and facilitate task-shifting, which could address the problem of fragmentation in health care. Although eLearning and blended learning technology interventions have been implemented, primary studies have not assessed their cost-effectiveness. Hence, to ascertain the technology’s cost-saving potential, we used a blended advanced cardiac life support (B-ACLS) course as an exemplar and compared its cost to face-to-face advanced life support (F-ACLS) training. The analysis showed that the annual cost of F-ACLS training (USD$72,793) was 1.7 times higher than B-ACLS training (USD$43,467). The discounted total cost of training over the life of the course (5-years) was SGD $107,960 for B-ACLS and S$280,162 for F-ACLS. The cost of productivity loss accounted for 52% and 23% of the costs for F-ACLS and B-ACLS, respectively. B-ACLS yielded a 160% return on the money invested, yielding $1.60 for every dollar spent. There would be a 61% saving for course providers if they delivered a B-ACLS instead of F-ACLS course. The effectiveness component of the HTA showed that online eLearning and blended learning is as effective as traditional learning and has cost-saving potential. We also sought to determine if this technology could be used to train and equip optometrists and opticians in Singapore to take on an extended role in primary care, which would allow some simple primary eye care tasks to be shifted from ophthalmologists to optometrists and ease healthcare access issues at specialist hospital outpatient clinics. The survey of optometrists showed that the current roles of opticians and optometrists in Singapore were limited to diagnostic refraction (92%); colour vision assessment (65%); contact lens fitting and dispensing (62%) amongst others. The average self-rated primary eye care knowledge score was 8.2 ± 1.4; (score range 1-10; 1 = very poor, 10 = excellent). Average self-rated confidence scores for screening for cataract, diabetic retinopathy, chronic glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration were 2.7 ± 1.5; 3.7 ± 1.9; 4.0 ± 1.0 and 2.7 ± 1.5, respectively. Three fourths of the optometrists surveyed felt that they should undertake regular continuing professional education (CPE) to improve their primary eye care knowledge. Blended learning (eLearning and traditional face-to-face lectures) was the most preferred mode (46.8%) for CPE delivery. Conclusions: Overall, the findings from the HTA provide evidence of effectiveness, cost-saving of online eLearning and blended learning for training medical doctors and the acceptance of the technology in a local context to facilitate its wider adoption for training post-registration healthcare professionals’. These research outputs would have direct impact on the adoption of online eLearning, blended learning technologies in universities and educational institutes across the region with consequent impacts on post-registration health professionals’ education and policy. The results of learning will serve as a guide for policy makers to decide on investment in the learning technology and to learn about the associated factors, which would influence its adoption. This thesis resulted in three papers, of which one has been accepted for publication, the two other papers are under review.Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, Adelaide Medical School, 201

Virtual Reality for Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration

Background: Virtual reality (VR) is a technology that allows the user to explore and manipulate computer-generated real or artificial three-dimensional multimedia sensory environments in real time to gain practical knowledge that can be used in clinical practice. Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of VR for educating health professionals and improving their knowledge, cognitive skills, attitudes, and satisfaction. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the effectiveness of VR in pre- and postregistration health professions education following the gold standard Cochrane methodology. We searched 7 databases from the year 1990 to August 2017. No language restrictions were applied. We included randomized controlled trials and cluster-randomized trials. We independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, and then, we compared the information in pairs. We contacted authors of the studies for additional information if necessary. All pooled analyses were based on random-effects models. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to rate the quality of the body of evidence. Results: A total of 31 studies (2407 participants) were included. Meta-analysis of 8 studies found that VR slightly improves postintervention knowledge scores when compared with traditional learning (standardized mean difference [SMD]=0.44; 95% CI 0.18-0.69; I2=49%; 603 participants; moderate certainty evidence) or other types of digital education such as online or offline digital education (SMD=0.43; 95% CI 0.07-0.79; I2=78%; 608 participants [8 studies]; low certainty evidence). Another meta-analysis of 4 studies found that VR improves health professionals’ cognitive skills when compared with traditional learning (SMD=1.12; 95% CI 0.81-1.43; I2=0%; 235 participants; large effect size; moderate certainty evidence). Two studies compared the effect of VR with other forms of digital education on skills, favoring the VR group (SMD=0.5; 95% CI 0.32-0.69; I2=0%; 467 participants; moderate effect size; low certainty evidence). The findings for attitudes and satisfaction were mixed and inconclusive. None of the studies reported any patient-related outcomes, behavior change, as well as unintended or adverse effects of VR. Overall, the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE criteria ranged from low to moderate. We downgraded our certainty of evidence primarily because of the risk of bias and/or inconsistency. Conclusions: We found evidence suggesting that VR improves postintervention knowledge and skills outcomes of health professionals when compared with traditional education or other types of digital education such as online or offline digital education. The findings on other outcomes are limited. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of immersive and interactive forms of VR and evaluate other outcomes such as attitude, satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, and clinical practice or behavior change.</br

Offline eLearning for undergraduates in health professions: A systematic review of the impact on knowledge, skills, attitudes and satisfaction

Background: The world is short of 7.2 million health–care workers and this figure is growing. The shortage of teachers is even greater, which limits traditional education modes. eLearning may help overcome this training need. Offline eLearning is useful in remote and resource–limited settings with poor internet access. To inform investments in offline eLearning, we need to establish its effectiveness in terms of gaining knowledge and skills, students’ satisfaction and attitudes towards eLearning. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of offline eLearning for students enrolled in undergraduate, health–related university degrees. We included randomised controlled trials that compared offline eLearning to traditional learning or an alternative eLearning method. We searched the major bibliographic databases in August 2013 to identify articles that focused primarily on students’ knowledge, skills, satisfaction and attitudes toward eLearning, and health economic information and adverse effects as secondary outcomes. We also searched reference lists of relevant studies. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies. We synthesized the findings using a thematic summary approach. Findings: Forty–nine studies, including 4955 students enrolled in undergraduate medical, dentistry, nursing, psychology, or physical therapy studies, met the inclusion criteria. Eleven of the 33 studies testing knowledge gains found significantly higher gains in the eLearning intervention groups compared to traditional learning, whereas 21 did not detect significant differences or found mixed results. One study did not test for differences. Eight studies detected significantly higher skill gains in the eLearning intervention groups, whilst the other 5 testing skill gains did not detect differences between groups. No study found offline eLearning as inferior. Generally no differences in attitudes or preference of eLearning over traditional learning were observed. No clear trends were found in the comparison of different modes of eLearning. Most of the studies were small and subject to several biases. Conclusions: Our results suggest that offline eLearning is equivalent and possibly superior to traditional learning regarding knowledge, skills, attitudes and satisfaction. Although a robust conclusion cannot be drawn due to variable quality of the evidence, these results justify further investment into offline eLearning to address the global health care workforce shortage

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

The development and validation of a scoring tool to predict the operative duration of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background: The ability to accurately predict operative duration has the potential to optimise theatre efficiency and utilisation, thus reducing costs and increasing staff and patient satisfaction. With laparoscopic cholecystectomy being one of the most commonly performed procedures worldwide, a tool to predict operative duration could be extremely beneficial to healthcare organisations. Methods: Data collected from the CholeS study on patients undergoing cholecystectomy in UK and Irish hospitals between 04/2014 and 05/2014 were used to study operative duration. A multivariable binary logistic regression model was produced in order to identify significant independent predictors of long (> 90 min) operations. The resulting model was converted to a risk score, which was subsequently validated on second cohort of patients using ROC curves. Results: After exclusions, data were available for 7227 patients in the derivation (CholeS) cohort. The median operative duration was 60 min (interquartile range 45–85), with 17.7% of operations lasting longer than 90 min. Ten factors were found to be significant independent predictors of operative durations > 90 min, including ASA, age, previous surgical admissions, BMI, gallbladder wall thickness and CBD diameter. A risk score was then produced from these factors, and applied to a cohort of 2405 patients from a tertiary centre for external validation. This returned an area under the ROC curve of 0.708 (SE = 0.013, p  90 min increasing more than eightfold from 5.1 to 41.8% in the extremes of the score. Conclusion: The scoring tool produced in this study was found to be significantly predictive of long operative durations on validation in an external cohort. As such, the tool may have the potential to enable organisations to better organise theatre lists and deliver greater efficiencies in care

Multiple novel prostate cancer susceptibility signals identified by fine-mapping of known risk loci among Europeans

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified numerous common prostate cancer (PrCa) susceptibility loci. We have fine-mapped 64 GWAS regions known at the conclusion of the iCOGS study using large-scale genotyping and imputation in 25 723 PrCa cases and 26 274 controls of European ancestry. We detected evidence for multiple independent signals at 16 regions, 12 of which contained additional newly identified significant associations. A single signal comprising a spectrum of correlated variation was observed at 39 regions; 35 of which are now described by a novel more significantly associated lead SNP, while the originally reported variant remained as the lead SNP only in 4 regions. We also confirmed two association signals in Europeans that had been previously reported only in East-Asian GWAS. Based on statistical evidence and linkage disequilibrium (LD) structure, we have curated and narrowed down the list of the most likely candidate causal variants for each region. Functional annotation using data from ENCODE filtered for PrCa cell lines and eQTL analysis demonstrated significant enrichment for overlap with bio-features within this set. By incorporating the novel risk variants identified here alongside the refined data for existing association signals, we estimate that these loci now explain ∼38.9% of the familial relative risk of PrCa, an 8.9% improvement over the previously reported GWAS tag SNPs. This suggests that a significant fraction of the heritability of PrCa may have been hidden during the discovery phase of GWAS, in particular due to the presence of multiple independent signals within the same regio

Procalcitonin Is Not a Reliable Biomarker of Bacterial Coinfection in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Undergoing Microbiological Investigation at the Time of Hospital Admission

Abstract Admission procalcitonin measurements and microbiology results were available for 1040 hospitalized adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (from 48 902 included in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium World Health Organization Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK study). Although procalcitonin was higher in bacterial coinfection, this was neither clinically significant (median [IQR], 0.33 [0.11–1.70] ng/mL vs 0.24 [0.10–0.90] ng/mL) nor diagnostically useful (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.56 [95% confidence interval, .51–.60]).</jats:p

Implementation of corticosteroids in treating COVID-19 in the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK:prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone was the first intervention proven to reduce mortality in patients with COVID-19 being treated in hospital. We aimed to evaluate the adoption of corticosteroids in the treatment of COVID-19 in the UK after the RECOVERY trial publication on June 16, 2020, and to identify discrepancies in care. METHODS: We did an audit of clinical implementation of corticosteroids in a prospective, observational, cohort study in 237 UK acute care hospitals between March 16, 2020, and April 14, 2021, restricted to patients aged 18 years or older with proven or high likelihood of COVID-19, who received supplementary oxygen. The primary outcome was administration of dexamethasone, prednisolone, hydrocortisone, or methylprednisolone. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN66726260. FINDINGS: Between June 17, 2020, and April 14, 2021, 47 795 (75·2%) of 63 525 of patients on supplementary oxygen received corticosteroids, higher among patients requiring critical care than in those who received ward care (11 185 [86·6%] of 12 909 vs 36 415 [72·4%] of 50 278). Patients 50 years or older were significantly less likely to receive corticosteroids than those younger than 50 years (adjusted odds ratio 0·79 [95% CI 0·70–0·89], p=0·0001, for 70–79 years; 0·52 [0·46–0·58], p80 years), independent of patient demographics and illness severity. 84 (54·2%) of 155 pregnant women received corticosteroids. Rates of corticosteroid administration increased from 27·5% in the week before June 16, 2020, to 75–80% in January, 2021. INTERPRETATION: Implementation of corticosteroids into clinical practice in the UK for patients with COVID-19 has been successful, but not universal. Patients older than 70 years, independent of illness severity, chronic neurological disease, and dementia, were less likely to receive corticosteroids than those who were younger, as were pregnant women. This could reflect appropriate clinical decision making, but the possibility of inequitable access to life-saving care should be considered. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research and UK Medical Research Council

A Multicenter, Randomized, Placebo‐Controlled Trial of Atorvastatin for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with increased cardiovascular event (CVE) risk. The impact of statins in RA is not established. We assessed whether atorvastatin is superior to placebo for the primary prevention of CVEs in RA patients. Methods: A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial was designed to detect a 32% CVE risk reduction based on an estimated 1.6% per annum event rate with 80% power at P 50 years or with a disease duration of >10 years who did not have clinical atherosclerosis, diabetes, or myopathy received atorvastatin 40 mg daily or matching placebo. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischemic attack, or any arterial revascularization. Secondary and tertiary end points included plasma lipids and safety. Results: A total of 3,002 patients (mean age 61 years; 74% female) were followed up for a median of 2.51 years (interquartile range [IQR] 1.90, 3.49 years) (7,827 patient‐years). The study was terminated early due to a lower than expected event rate (0.70% per annum). Of the 1,504 patients receiving atorvastatin, 24 (1.6%) experienced a primary end point, compared with 36 (2.4%) of the 1,498 receiving placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.39, 1.11]; P = 0.115 and adjusted HR 0.60 [95% CI 0.32, 1.15]; P = 0.127). At trial end, patients receiving atorvastatin had a mean ± SD low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level 0.77 ± 0.04 mmoles/liter lower than those receiving placebo (P < 0.0001). C‐reactive protein level was also significantly lower in the atorvastatin group than the placebo group (median 2.59 mg/liter [IQR 0.94, 6.08] versus 3.60 mg/liter [IQR 1.47, 7.49]; P < 0.0001). CVE risk reduction per mmole/liter reduction in LDL cholesterol was 42% (95% CI −14%, 70%). The rates of adverse events in the atorvastatin group (n = 298 [19.8%]) and placebo group (n = 292 [19.5%]) were similar. Conclusion: Atorvastatin 40 mg daily is safe and results in a significantly greater reduction of LDL cholesterol level than placebo in patients with RA. The 34% CVE risk reduction is consistent with the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration meta‐analysis of statin effects in other populations