Cargando…

Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The impact of evidence-based medicine (EBM) training techniques in primary healthcare professionals remains to be determined. METHODS: A non-randomized controlled trial (NRCT) was performed aiming to assess the two methods of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare profes...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fei, Jiaojiao, Li, Yanhua, Gao, Weifei, Li, Junwei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6286505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30526573
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1404-y
_version_ 1783379467994923008
author Fei, Jiaojiao
Li, Yanhua
Gao, Weifei
Li, Junwei
author_facet Fei, Jiaojiao
Li, Yanhua
Gao, Weifei
Li, Junwei
author_sort Fei, Jiaojiao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The impact of evidence-based medicine (EBM) training techniques in primary healthcare professionals remains to be determined. METHODS: A non-randomized controlled trial (NRCT) was performed aiming to assess the two methods of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals by assessing evidence based practice (EBP) related knowledge (EBP-K), attitude (EBP-A), personal application (EBP-P), anticipated future use (EBP-F), and community management of hypertension. Participants were recruited and assigned to either an EBM training group that receiving a weekly face-to-face EBM training course, or an EBM self-instruction course for eight weeks. A validated instrument was applied to evaluate the four aspects of EBP. Additionally, community management of hypertension was assessed by comparing the the rate of detection, blood pressure control, standard management, grading management and patient satisfaction between 2015 and 2016 to measure training efficacy. The difference between the impact of these two interventions was assessed statistically. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one participants (69 in the face-to-face EBM training group and 82 in the self-instruction group) were included. Compared to self-instruction, the face-to-face EBM training was associated with significantly improved EBP-Knowledge (26.14 ± 4.22 vs. 22.44 ± 4.47, P < 0.05), EBP-Personal application (22.52 ± 6.18 vs. 16.89 ± 5.99, P < 0.05), and EBP-Future use (44.04 ± 8.97 vs. 37.71 ± 8.39, P < 0.05). EBP-Attitude scores (10.89 ± 4.52 vs.14.93 ± 5.92, P < 0.000) were lower in the EBM training group. Stratified analyses showed that the results were consistent regardless of the participants’ gender, professional role (doctors & apothecaries or nurses), rank (junior or senior doctors & apothecaries), or specialty (Traditional Chinese or Western Medicine). Assessment of community hypertension management revealed that the rate of blood pressure control, standardized hypertension management and patient satisfaction was significantly better in group A than group B (1.14% vs.0.69, 2.85% vs.1.68 and 2.41% vs.0.84%). CONCLUSIONS: A face-to-face EBM training course improved primary healthcare professionals’ EBP knowledge, attitudes, personal application, and anticipated future use. Effective EBM training may improve the efficacy of primary health care services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Non-Randomized Controlled Trial ChiCTR1800017498, August 1, 2018. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-018-1404-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6286505
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62865052018-12-14 Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial Fei, Jiaojiao Li, Yanhua Gao, Weifei Li, Junwei BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: The impact of evidence-based medicine (EBM) training techniques in primary healthcare professionals remains to be determined. METHODS: A non-randomized controlled trial (NRCT) was performed aiming to assess the two methods of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals by assessing evidence based practice (EBP) related knowledge (EBP-K), attitude (EBP-A), personal application (EBP-P), anticipated future use (EBP-F), and community management of hypertension. Participants were recruited and assigned to either an EBM training group that receiving a weekly face-to-face EBM training course, or an EBM self-instruction course for eight weeks. A validated instrument was applied to evaluate the four aspects of EBP. Additionally, community management of hypertension was assessed by comparing the the rate of detection, blood pressure control, standard management, grading management and patient satisfaction between 2015 and 2016 to measure training efficacy. The difference between the impact of these two interventions was assessed statistically. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one participants (69 in the face-to-face EBM training group and 82 in the self-instruction group) were included. Compared to self-instruction, the face-to-face EBM training was associated with significantly improved EBP-Knowledge (26.14 ± 4.22 vs. 22.44 ± 4.47, P < 0.05), EBP-Personal application (22.52 ± 6.18 vs. 16.89 ± 5.99, P < 0.05), and EBP-Future use (44.04 ± 8.97 vs. 37.71 ± 8.39, P < 0.05). EBP-Attitude scores (10.89 ± 4.52 vs.14.93 ± 5.92, P < 0.000) were lower in the EBM training group. Stratified analyses showed that the results were consistent regardless of the participants’ gender, professional role (doctors & apothecaries or nurses), rank (junior or senior doctors & apothecaries), or specialty (Traditional Chinese or Western Medicine). Assessment of community hypertension management revealed that the rate of blood pressure control, standardized hypertension management and patient satisfaction was significantly better in group A than group B (1.14% vs.0.69, 2.85% vs.1.68 and 2.41% vs.0.84%). CONCLUSIONS: A face-to-face EBM training course improved primary healthcare professionals’ EBP knowledge, attitudes, personal application, and anticipated future use. Effective EBM training may improve the efficacy of primary health care services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Non-Randomized Controlled Trial ChiCTR1800017498, August 1, 2018. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-018-1404-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6286505/ /pubmed/30526573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1404-y Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fei, Jiaojiao
Li, Yanhua
Gao, Weifei
Li, Junwei
Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial
title Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial
title_full Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial
title_short Efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial
title_sort efficacy of evidence-based medicine training for primary healthcare professionals: a non-randomized controlled trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6286505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30526573
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1404-y
work_keys_str_mv AT feijiaojiao efficacyofevidencebasedmedicinetrainingforprimaryhealthcareprofessionalsanonrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT liyanhua efficacyofevidencebasedmedicinetrainingforprimaryhealthcareprofessionalsanonrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT gaoweifei efficacyofevidencebasedmedicinetrainingforprimaryhealthcareprofessionalsanonrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lijunwei efficacyofevidencebasedmedicinetrainingforprimaryhealthcareprofessionalsanonrandomizedcontrolledtrial