Does integrated training in evidence-based medicine (EBM) in the general practice (GP) specialty training improve EBM behaviour in daily clinical practice? A cluster randomised controlled trial

Open Access
Authors
  • N.J. de Wit
  • A.W. Hoes
Publication date 09-2016
Journal BMJ Open
Article number e010537
Volume | Issue number 6 | 9
Number of pages 12
Organisations
  • Faculty of Dentistry (ACTA)
Abstract

Objectives

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is an important element in the general practice (GP) specialty training. Studies show that integrating EBM training into clinical practice brings larger benefits than stand-alone modules. However, these studies have neither been performed in GP nor assessed EBM behaviour of former trainees in daily clinical practice.

Setting

GP specialty training in the Netherlands.

Participants

All 82 third year GP trainees who started their final third year in 2011 were approached for inclusion, of whom 79 (96%) participated: 39 in the intervention group and 40 in the control group.

Intervention

Integrated EBM training, in which EBM is embedded closely within the clinical context by joint assignments for the trainee and supervisor in daily practice, and teaching sessions based on dilemmas from actual patient consultations.

Comparison

Stand-alone EBM training at the institute only.

Primary and secondary outcomes

Our primary outcome was EBM behaviour, assessed by measuring guideline adherence (incorporating rational, motivated deviation) and information-seeking behaviour. Our secondary outcomes were EBM attitude and EBM knowledge. Data were acquired using logbooks and questionnaires, respectively. Analyses were performed using mixed models.

Results

Logbook data were available from 76 (96%) of the participating trainees at baseline (7614 consultations), 60 (76%) at the end of the third year (T1, 4973 consultations) and 53 (67%) 1 year after graduation (T2, 3307 consultations). We found no significant differences in outcomes between the 2 groups, with relative risks for guideline adherence varying between 0.96 and 0.99 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.11) at T1, and 0.99 and 1.10 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.25) at T2, and for information-seeking behaviour between 0.97 and 1.16 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.91) and 0.90 and 1.10 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.32), respectively.

Conclusions

Integrated EBM training compared with stand-alone EBM training does not improve EBM behaviour, attitude or knowledge of (future) GPs.

Document type Article
Note With online supplementary appendix
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010537
Other links https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84988417473
Downloads
e010537.full.pd (Final published version)
Permalink to this page
Back