BackgroundThe implementation of new medical knowledge into general practice is a complex process. Blended learning may offer an effective and efficient educational intervention to reduce the knowledge-to-practice gap. The aim of this study was to compare knowledge acquisition about dementia management between a blended learning approach using online modules in addition to quality circles (QCs) and QCs alone.MethodsIn this cluster-randomised trial with QCs as clusters and general practitioners (GPs) as participants, 389 GPs from 26 QCs in the western part of Germany were invited to participate. Data on the GPs' knowledge were obtained at three points in time by means of a questionnaire survey. Primary outcome was the knowledge gain before and after the interventions. A subgroup analysis of the users of the online modules was performed.Results166 GPs were available for analysis and filled out a knowledge test at least two times. A significant increase of knowledge was found in both groups that indicated positive learning effects of both approaches. However, there was no significant difference between the groups. A subgroup analysis of the GPs who self-reported that they had actually used the online modules showed that they had a significant increase in their knowledge scores.ConclusionA blended learning approach was not superior to a QCs approach for improving knowledge about dementia management. However, a subgroup of GPs who were motivated to actually use the online modules had a gain in knowledge.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN36550981.

BackgroundProblem-based Learning (PBL) has been suggested as a key educational method of knowledge acquisition to improve medical education. We sought to evaluate the differences in medical school education between graduates from PBL-based and conventional curricula and to what extent these curricula fit job requirements.MethodsGraduates from all German medical schools who graduated between 1996 and 2002 were eligible for this study. Graduates self-assessed nine competencies as required at their day-to-day work and as taught in medical school on a 6-point Likert scale. Results were compared between graduates from a PBL-based curriculum (University Witten/Herdecke) and conventional curricula.ResultsThree schools were excluded because of low response rates. Baseline demographics between graduates of the PBL-based curriculum (n = 101, 49% female) and the conventional curricula (n = 4720, 49% female) were similar. No major differences were observed regarding job requirements with priorities for "Independent learning/working" and "Practical medical skills". All competencies were rated to be better taught in PBL-based curriculum compared to the conventional curricula (all p < 0.001), except for "Medical knowledge" and "Research competence". Comparing competencies required at work and taught in medical school, PBL was associated with benefits in "Interdisciplinary thinking" (Δ + 0.88), "Independent learning/working" (Δ + 0.57), "Psycho-social competence" (Δ + 0.56), "Teamwork" (Δ + 0.39) and "Problem-solving skills" (Δ + 0.36), whereas "Research competence" (Δ - 1.23) and "Business competence" (Δ - 1.44) in the PBL-based curriculum needed improvement.ConclusionAmong medical graduates in Germany, PBL demonstrated benefits with regard to competencies which were highly required in the job of physicians. Research and business competence deserve closer attention in future curricular development.

OBJECTIVE:To describe the expectations that patients and their physicians have for outcomes after surgical treatment for sciatica and to examine the associations between expectations and outcomes. DESIGN:Prospective cohort study. SETTING ր PATIENTS:We recruited 273 patients, from the offices of orthopedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, and occupational medicine physicians in Maine, who had diskectomy for sciatica. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Patients' and physicians' expectations were measured before surgery. Satisfaction with care and changes in symptoms and functional status were measured 12 months after surgery. More patients who expected a shorter recovery time after surgery were "delighted," "pleased," or "mostly satisfied" with their outcomes 12 months after surgery than patients who expected a longer recovery time (odds ratio [OR] 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1, 4.4). Also, more patients who preferred surgery after learning that sciatica could get better without surgery had good symptom scores 12 months after surgery than patients who did not prefer surgery (OR 2.9; 95% CI 1.2, 7.0). When physicians predicted a "great deal of improvement" after surgery, 39% of patients were not satisfied with their outcomes and 25% said their symptoms had not improved. CONCLUSIONS:More patients with favorable expectations about surgery had good outcomes than patients with unfavorable expectations. Physicians' expectations were overly optimistic. Patient expectations appear to be important predictors of outcomes, and eliciting them may help physicians identify patients more likely to benefit from diskectomy for sciatica.

Background: Several studies suggest that General Practitioners (GPs) prefer "traditional" media such as journals or quality circles when they are seeking out different options to meet their continuing medical education (CME) requirements. A survey was designed in order to gain a better understanding of German General Practitioners' preferences for different forms of educational media that will meet their CME needs.Methods: Four hundred and forty nine (N = 449) German physicians were contacted to take part in this study on the occasion of one of their quality circle meetings. The participating physicians received a standardized 26-item-questionnaire that surveyed their preferences for different forms of educational media. A factor analysis was performed in order to determine whether the observed variables can be explained largely or entirely in terms of the underlying patterns.Results: Two hundred and sixty-four physicians with an average age of 51.1 years participated (28.5% female, 71.5% male). We found that GPs favor learning environments such as: journals, colleagues, and quality circles. New media like the internet was used less often for their learning activities, even though the usage of the internet in general was quite high. The most important requirements for media in medical education as perceived by the participants were its relevancy for daily practice and dependability. Conclusion:Despite a growing use of the Internet it seems that German GPs favor "classical/ traditional" settings for their learning activities. These results should be taken into consideration when planning CME or CPD programs or other learning activities.Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36550981. BackgroundIn the context of medical care recent, significant developments in the areas of technology, therapy and new forms of medical treatment ask for a timely diffusion of available evidence on interventions. Thus the translation of knowledge into practice is essential in order to maintain and increase the quality of daily practice [1]. As a consequence, health professionals such as General Practitioners (GPs) have to ensure that their knowledge and skills are up to date. Since the early Eighties, a number of studies and reviews have demonstrated the positive influence continuing medical education (CME) has on a physicians' knowledge and competence [2][3][4]. Over the same period of time, peer review groups and quality circles (QCs) have formed, i.e. regional meetings of GPs including specialists in order to discuss both clinical topics and new developments in politics and funding. The first QCs of GPs in Germany were founded in 1991/92 to help GPs tackle problems of quality management in the patients' daily care. Today, the participation of German GPs in QCs is mandatory in order to be part of most of the governmental funded disease management programs or to be part of model projects and initiatives from health insurers. Hence, nearly 50% of all German GPs are now organized in QCs [5]. Parallel to this proce...

An efficient knowledge transfer through computerized guidelines was not achieved. Usage, individual learning and potential implementation depend on adequate incentives and pragmatic aspects of clinical practice: easy and quick access.

BackgroundThere has been little systematic research about the extent to which German physicians accept or reject the concept and practice ofa) clinical practice guidelines (CPG) andb) evidence based medicine (EBM)The aim of this study was to investigate German office-based physicians' perspective on CPGs and EBM and their application in medical practice.MethodsStructured national telephone survey of ambulatory care physicians, four thematic blocks with 21 questions (5 point Likert scale). 511 office-based general practitioners and specialists. Main outcome measures were the application of Clinical Practice Guidelines in daily practice, preference for sources of guidelines and degree of knowledge and acceptance of EBM. In the data analysis Pearson's correlation coefficient was used for explorative analysis of correlations. The comparison of groups was performed by Student's t-test. Chi2 test was used to investigate distribution of two or more categorical variables.ResultsOf the total study population 55.3% of physicians reported already using guidelines in the treatment of patients. Physicians in group practices (GrP) as well as general practitioners (GP) agreed significantly more with the usefulness of guidelines as a basis for patient care than doctors in single practices (SP) or specialists (S) (Student's t-test mean GP 2.57, S 2.84, p < 0.01; mean GrP 2.55, SP 2.80, p < 0.05). 33.1% of the participants demonstrated a strong rejection to the application of guidelines in patient care. Acceptance of guidelines from a governmental institution was substantially lower than from physician networks or medical societies (36.2% vs. 53.4% vs. 62.0%). 73.8% of doctors interpret EBM as a combination of scientific research and individual medical knowledge; 80% regard EBM as the best basis for patient care.ConclusionDespite a majority of physicians accepting and applying CPGs a large group remains that is critical and opposed to the utilization of CPGs in daily practice and to the concept of EBM in general. Doctors in single practice and specialists appear to be more critical than physicians in group practices and GPs. Future research is needed to evaluate the willingness to acquire necessary knowledge and skills for the promotion and routine application of CPGs.

Background: Thus far important findings regarding the dementia syndrome have been implemented into patients' medical care only inadequately. A professional training accounting for both, general practitioners' (GP) needs and learning preferences as well as care-relevant aspects could be a major step towards improving medical care. In the WIDA-study, entitled "Knowledge translation on dementia in general practice" two different training concepts are developed, implemented and evaluated. Both concepts are building on an evidence-based, GP-related dementia guideline and communicate the guideline's essential insights.

BackgroundCurrent guidelines for dementia care recommend the combination of drug therapy with non-pharmaceutical measures like counselling and social support. However, the scientific evidence concerning non-pharmaceutical interventions for dementia patients and their informal caregivers remains inconclusive. Targets of modern comprehensive dementia care are to enable patients to live at home as long and as independent as possible and to reduce the burden of caregivers. The objective of the study is to compare a complex intervention including caregiver support groups and counselling against usual care in terms of time to nursing home placement. In this paper the study protocol is described.Methods/DesignThe IDA (Initiative Demenzversorgung in der Allgemeinmedizin) project is designed as a three armed cluster-randomized trial where dementia patients and their informal caregivers are recruited by general practitioners. Patients in the study region of Middle Franconia, Germany, are included if they have mild or moderate dementia, are at least 65 years old, and are members of the German AOK (Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse) sickness fund. In the control group patients receive regular treatment, whereas in the two intervention groups general practitioners participate in a training course in evidence based dementia treatment, recommend support groups and offer counseling to the family caregivers either beginning at baseline or after the 1-year follow-up. The study recruitment and follow-up took place from July 2005 to January 2009. 303 general practitioners were randomized of which 129 recruited a total of 390 patients. Time to nursing home admission within the two year intervention and follow-up period is the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints are cognitive status, activities of daily living, burden of care giving as well as healthcare costs. For an economic analysis from the societal perspective, data are collected from caregivers as well as by the use of routine data from statutory health insurance and long-term care insurance.DiscussionFrom a public health perspective, the IDA trial is expected to lead to evidence based results on the community effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical support measures for dementia patients and their caregivers in the primary care sector. For health policy makers it is necessary to make their decisions about financing new services based on strong knowledge about the acceptance of measures in the population and their cost-effectiveness.Trial registrationISRCTN68329593