AMEE Berlin 2002 Programme

Session 2G Continuing professional development
2G1 Learning and partnering: bringing
pharmaceutical representatives
into the educational loop
Jane Tipping*, Craig Campbell, Jean Claude Dairon, Paul
Davis, Francois Goulet, Gilles Lachance, Celine Monette,
Joan Sargeant, Linda Snell and Robert Thivierge
10987 Warden Avenue, Markham, Ontario L6C 1M9,
CANADA
Pharmaceutical representatives play a key role in
upholding high standards for CME in Canada.
Representatives receive many opportunities to upgrade
knowledge of disease states and management; however
very little is offered for the practice of CME. A group
of dedicated professionals from across Canada
representing academia, industry and the Council for
Continuing Pharmaceutical Education has created a
training module specifically for pharmaceutical
representatives. The outcome has been a quality
program that includes a method of training and
evaluation unique in format and congruent with the
philosophy of adult education. The coalition of three
stakeholder groups represents an example of
partnership that promises to offer a means of raising
and maintaining standards of CME across the country.
A method of education and evaluation is presented that
will evoke critical discussion in the issues of industry
CME and the meaning of partnership. Methods of
conducting research on efficacy will also be discussed.
2G2 CME with a combination of
standardised patients and a CBT
programme
S Schewe*, A Schewe and J Loohs
Medizinische Poliklinik, Klinikum der Universitat, Ludwig-
Maximilians-Universitat, Pettenkoferstr 8a, D-80336 Munich,
GERMANY
A new approach to continuous medical education CME
concerns teaching and knowledge assessing of general
practitioners in musculoskeletal diseases sponsored by
Aventis Pharma. The three elements of the CMEseminar
were an interactive tutorial with a CBTprogramme,
the assessment and discussion of problem
solving strategies including three standardized patients
with frequent musculoskeletal diseases and finally a
lecture on innovative therapeutic possibilities. The new
form of CME was welcomed by nearly all of the 26
physicians (with the exception of 1); their opinion about
this kind of training was very positive. Individual
deficits in problem solving were obvious to each of
the physicians so that immediate improvement was
possible. The three educational elements of the CME
were judged almost equally with a slight advantage for
the part with the standardised patients. The CBT
programme was considered an integral and important
part of the rheumatology seminar.
Monday 3 September
- 4.12 -
2G3 The impact of continuing
professional development (CPD):
30 case studies of dentists
Vickie Firmstone*, Alison Bullock and John Frame
Centre for Research in Medical & Dental Education, School of
Education, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham
B15 2TT, UK
This presentation reports on a key part of a Department
of Health funded study whose principal aim was to
explore the impact of CPD on the practice of GDPs.
Thirty dentists were interviewed before and after
undertaking a self-chosen educational activity.
Discussion focussed on the specific activity and on their
experience of CPD more generally. Factors affecting
the impact of CPD on practice include:
1 the process by which CPD is selected. Much is
undertaken on an ad hoc/ opportunistic basis rather
than an analysis of learning needs. This can lead to
CPD which ‘confirms’ current practice rather than
introduces new learning;
2 barriers to undertaking CPD (access, time,
financial); and
3 constraints to implementing change.
There was broad support for the importance of CPD
for personal and professional development, but there
are significant factors which affect the impact of CPD
in general dental practice.
2G4 Global trends in continuing medical
education
Lewis A Miller
Global Alliance for Medical Education, 90 Goodwives River
Road, Darien, CT 06820-5921, USA
Patterns of Continuing Medical Education (CME) are
changing rapidly worldwide. Accreditation systems are
being adopted rapidly in Europe and Latin America,
but are not yet well recognized. At the same time some
countries and medical specialties are changing from
CME to CPD (Continuous Professional Development)
despite failure of earlier CPD experiments. Methods
of delivering CME are also changing. Lectures are
regarded as less useful than newer forms of interactive
learning. The use of the Internet and CD-ROMs is
increasing. CME of the future will take place at the
point of care. Two new and critical issues are emerging
as CME becomes mandatory for many physicians:
1 Who regulates CME? Government or the
profession?
2 Who pays for CME? Government? Physicians?
Health insurance? Pharmaceutical Industry?
Medical educators in Europe have a major opportunity
to take a leadership role.