Cargando…

Uptake and effectiveness of online diabetes continuing education: The perspectives of Thai general practitioner trainees

BACKGROUND: Despite continuing medical education (CME) programmes on evidence-based diabetes care, evidence-based best practice and actual GP practice remain scant. Online CME offers numerous benefits to general practitioners (GPs), particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thepwongsa, Isaraporn, Muthukumar, Radhakrishnan, Sripa, Poompong, Piterman, Leon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9900372/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36755621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13355
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Despite continuing medical education (CME) programmes on evidence-based diabetes care, evidence-based best practice and actual GP practice remain scant. Online CME offers numerous benefits to general practitioners (GPs), particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In Thailand, CME is a voluntary process and is yet to be established as a mandatory requirement. This study examined GP uptake of online diabetes CME and the changes in GPs’ attitudes to and knowledge of Type 2 diabetes management. METHODS: A cross-sectional study and a before-and-after study were employed with 279 GP trainees who voluntarily undertook a newly-developed online diabetes programme. A follow-up survey was conducted six months after the GP trainees completed their training. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve out of 279 GP trainees (40.1%) participated in the study, of whom 37 (13.3%) enrolled in the online diabetes programme, and 20 (7.2%) completed the programme. Before enrolling in the programme, the participants' mean diabetes knowledge score was 61.5%. The participants’ confidence in effective insulin treatment increased significantly after the programme (95% Confidence interval [CI], −0.51-0.00; P = 0.05), but their knowledge scores before and after the programme were not statistically different (95% CI, −3.93-0.59; P = 0.14). CONCLUSION: Uptake of the online diabetes CME was poor, although appropriate recruitment strategies were employed, and the online educational option was attractive and accessible during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study emphasises the gap between evidence-based practice and actual GP practice and the need for mandatory CME.