Cargando…
Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration
BACKGROUND: The widening gap between innovations in the medical field and the dissemination of such information to doctors may affect the quality of care. Offline computer-based digital education (OCDE) may be a potential solution to overcoming the geographical, financial, and temporal obstacles fac...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
JMIR Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6418481/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30821689 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/12998 |
_version_ | 1783403743085068288 |
---|---|
author | Wahabi, Hayfaa Abdelmageed Esmaeil, Samia Ahmed Bahkali, Khawater Hassan Titi, Maher Abdelraheim Amer, Yasser Sami Fayed, Amel Ahmed Jamal, Amr Zakaria, Nasriah Siddiqui, Amna Rehana Semwal, Monika Car, Lorainne Tudor Posadzki, Paul Car, Josip |
author_facet | Wahabi, Hayfaa Abdelmageed Esmaeil, Samia Ahmed Bahkali, Khawater Hassan Titi, Maher Abdelraheim Amer, Yasser Sami Fayed, Amel Ahmed Jamal, Amr Zakaria, Nasriah Siddiqui, Amna Rehana Semwal, Monika Car, Lorainne Tudor Posadzki, Paul Car, Josip |
author_sort | Wahabi, Hayfaa Abdelmageed |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The widening gap between innovations in the medical field and the dissemination of such information to doctors may affect the quality of care. Offline computer-based digital education (OCDE) may be a potential solution to overcoming the geographical, financial, and temporal obstacles faced by doctors. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this systematic review were to evaluate the effectiveness of OCDE compared with face-to-face learning, no intervention, or other types of digital learning for improving medical doctors’ knowledge, cognitive skills, and patient-related outcomes. Secondary objectives were to assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of OCDE and any adverse effects. METHODS: We searched major bibliographic databases from 1990 to August 2017 to identify relevant articles and followed the Cochrane methodology for systematic reviews of intervention. RESULTS: Overall, 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 cluster RCT (cRCT), and 1 quasi-RCT were included in this review. The total number of participants was 1690 in addition to the cRCT, which included 24 practices. Due to the heterogeneity of the participants, interventions, and outcomes, meta-analysis was not feasible, and the results were presented as narrative summary. Compared with face-to-face learning, the effect of OCDE on knowledge gain is uncertain (ratio of the means [RM] range 0.95-1.17; 8 studies, 495 participants; very low grade of evidence). From the same comparison, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skill gain is uncertain (RM range 0.1-0.9; 8 studies, 375 participants; very low grade of evidence). OCDE may have little or no effect on patients’ outcome compared with face-to-face education (2 studies, 62 participants; low grade of evidence). Compared with no intervention, OCDE may improve knowledge gain (RM range 1.36-0.98; 4 studies, 401 participants; low grade of evidence). From the same comparison, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skill gain is uncertain (RM range 1.1-1.15; 4 trials, 495 participants; very low grade of evidence). One cRCT, involving 24 practices, investigated patients’ outcome in this comparison and showed no difference between the 2 groups with low-grade evidence. Compared with text-based learning, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skills gain is uncertain (RM range 0.91-1.46; 3 trials with 4 interventions; 68 participants; very low-grade evidence). No study in this comparison investigated knowledge gain or patients’ outcomes. One study assessed the CE and showed that OCDE was cost-effective when compared with face-to-face learning if the cost is less than or equal to Can $200. No trial evaluated the adverse effect of OCDE. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of OCDE compared with other methods of education on medical doctors’ knowledge and cognitive skill gain is uncertain. OCDE may improve doctors’ knowledge compared with no intervention but its effect on doctors’ cognitive skills is uncertain. OCDE may have little or no effect in improving patients’ outcome. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6418481 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | JMIR Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64184812019-04-17 Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration Wahabi, Hayfaa Abdelmageed Esmaeil, Samia Ahmed Bahkali, Khawater Hassan Titi, Maher Abdelraheim Amer, Yasser Sami Fayed, Amel Ahmed Jamal, Amr Zakaria, Nasriah Siddiqui, Amna Rehana Semwal, Monika Car, Lorainne Tudor Posadzki, Paul Car, Josip J Med Internet Res Review BACKGROUND: The widening gap between innovations in the medical field and the dissemination of such information to doctors may affect the quality of care. Offline computer-based digital education (OCDE) may be a potential solution to overcoming the geographical, financial, and temporal obstacles faced by doctors. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this systematic review were to evaluate the effectiveness of OCDE compared with face-to-face learning, no intervention, or other types of digital learning for improving medical doctors’ knowledge, cognitive skills, and patient-related outcomes. Secondary objectives were to assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of OCDE and any adverse effects. METHODS: We searched major bibliographic databases from 1990 to August 2017 to identify relevant articles and followed the Cochrane methodology for systematic reviews of intervention. RESULTS: Overall, 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 cluster RCT (cRCT), and 1 quasi-RCT were included in this review. The total number of participants was 1690 in addition to the cRCT, which included 24 practices. Due to the heterogeneity of the participants, interventions, and outcomes, meta-analysis was not feasible, and the results were presented as narrative summary. Compared with face-to-face learning, the effect of OCDE on knowledge gain is uncertain (ratio of the means [RM] range 0.95-1.17; 8 studies, 495 participants; very low grade of evidence). From the same comparison, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skill gain is uncertain (RM range 0.1-0.9; 8 studies, 375 participants; very low grade of evidence). OCDE may have little or no effect on patients’ outcome compared with face-to-face education (2 studies, 62 participants; low grade of evidence). Compared with no intervention, OCDE may improve knowledge gain (RM range 1.36-0.98; 4 studies, 401 participants; low grade of evidence). From the same comparison, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skill gain is uncertain (RM range 1.1-1.15; 4 trials, 495 participants; very low grade of evidence). One cRCT, involving 24 practices, investigated patients’ outcome in this comparison and showed no difference between the 2 groups with low-grade evidence. Compared with text-based learning, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skills gain is uncertain (RM range 0.91-1.46; 3 trials with 4 interventions; 68 participants; very low-grade evidence). No study in this comparison investigated knowledge gain or patients’ outcomes. One study assessed the CE and showed that OCDE was cost-effective when compared with face-to-face learning if the cost is less than or equal to Can $200. No trial evaluated the adverse effect of OCDE. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of OCDE compared with other methods of education on medical doctors’ knowledge and cognitive skill gain is uncertain. OCDE may improve doctors’ knowledge compared with no intervention but its effect on doctors’ cognitive skills is uncertain. OCDE may have little or no effect in improving patients’ outcome. JMIR Publications 2019-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6418481/ /pubmed/30821689 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/12998 Text en ©Hayfaa Abdelmageed Wahabi, Samia Ahmed Esmaeil, Khawater Hassan Bahkali, Maher Abdelraheim Titi, Yasser Sami Amer, Amel Ahmed Fayed, Amr Jamal, Nasriah Zakaria, Amna Rehana Siddiqui, Monika Semwal, Lorainne Tudor Car, Paul Posadzki, Josip Car. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 01.03.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. |
spellingShingle | Review Wahabi, Hayfaa Abdelmageed Esmaeil, Samia Ahmed Bahkali, Khawater Hassan Titi, Maher Abdelraheim Amer, Yasser Sami Fayed, Amel Ahmed Jamal, Amr Zakaria, Nasriah Siddiqui, Amna Rehana Semwal, Monika Car, Lorainne Tudor Posadzki, Paul Car, Josip Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration |
title | Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration |
title_full | Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration |
title_fullStr | Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration |
title_full_unstemmed | Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration |
title_short | Medical Doctors’ Offline Computer-Assisted Digital Education: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration |
title_sort | medical doctors’ offline computer-assisted digital education: systematic review by the digital health education collaboration |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6418481/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30821689 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/12998 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wahabihayfaaabdelmageed medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT esmaeilsamiaahmed medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT bahkalikhawaterhassan medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT titimaherabdelraheim medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT ameryassersami medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT fayedamelahmed medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT jamalamr medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT zakarianasriah medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT siddiquiamnarehana medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT semwalmonika medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT carlorainnetudor medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT posadzkipaul medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration AT carjosip medicaldoctorsofflinecomputerassisteddigitaleducationsystematicreviewbythedigitalhealtheducationcollaboration |