A randomised controlled trial of a blended learning education intervention for teaching evidence-based medicine

BMC Medical Education

Elmer Villanueva⁴  Julie K Tilson¹  Paul Glasziou³  Rusli Bin Nordin²  Dragan Ilic⁵ 

[1] Division of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA;Jeffrey Cheah School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Monash University, Johor Bahru, Malaysia;Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Australia;Gippsland Medical School, Monash University, Churchill, Australia;Department of Epidemiology & Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Level 6, The Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Rd, Melbourne 3004, VIC, Australia

关键词: Blended learning;    Medical education;    Assessment;    Evidence based medicine;   

Others  :  1138386
DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-015-0321-6

 received in 2014-07-22, accepted in 2015-02-19,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Few studies have been performed to inform how best to teach evidence-based medicine (EBM) to medical trainees. Current evidence can only conclude that any form of teaching increases EBM competency, but cannot distinguish which form of teaching is most effective at increasing student competency in EBM. This study compared the effectiveness of a blended learning (BL) versus didactic learning (DL) approach of teaching EBM to medical students with respect to competency, self-efficacy, attitudes and behaviour toward EBM.

Methods

A mixed methods study consisting of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) and qualitative case study was performed with medical students undertaking their first clinical year of training in EBM. Students were randomly assigned to receive EBM teaching via either a BL approach or the incumbent DL approach. Competency in EBM was assessed using the Berlin questionnaire and the ‘Assessing Competency in EBM’ (ACE) tool. Students’ self-efficacy, attitudes and behaviour was also assessed. A series of focus groups was also performed to contextualise the quantitative results.

Results

A total of 147 students completed the RCT, and a further 29 students participated in six focus group discussions. Students who received the BL approach to teaching EBM had significantly higher scores in 5 out of 6 behaviour domains, 3 out of 4 attitude domains and 10 out of 14 self-efficacy domains. Competency in EBM did not differ significantly between students receiving the BL approach versus those receiving the DL approach [Mean Difference (MD)=−0.68, (95% CI–1.71, 0.34), p=0.19]. No significant difference was observed between sites (p=0.89) or by student type (p=0.58). Focus group discussions suggested a strong student preference for teaching using a BL approach, which integrates lectures, online learning and small group activities.

Conclusions

BL is no more effective than DL at increasing medical students’ knowledge and skills in EBM, but was significantly more effective at increasing student attitudes toward EBM and self-reported use of EBM in clinical practice. Given the various learning styles preferred by students, a multifaceted approach (incorporating BL) may be best suited when teaching EBM to medical students. Further research on the cost-effectiveness of EBM teaching modalities is required.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Ilic et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 1.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Finkel M, Brown H, Gerber L, Supino P: Teaching evidence-based medicine to medical students. Med Teach 2003, 25:202-9.
• [2]Meats E, Heneghan C, Crilly M, Glasziou P: Evidence-based medicine teaching in UK medical schools. Med Teach 2009, 31:332-7.
• [3]Ilic D, Hart W, Fiddes P, Misso M, Villanueva E: Adopting a blended learning approach to teaching evidence based medicine: a mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ 2013, 13:169. BioMed Central Full Text
• [4]Nair B, Coughlan J, Hensley M: Student and patient perspectives on bedside teaching. Med Educ 1997, 31:341-6.
• [5]Straus S, Glasziou P, Richardson W, Haynes B: Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach it. Churchill Livingstone: Elsevier, Edinburgh; 2011.
• [6]Ilic D: Assessing competency in Evidence Based Practice: strengths and limitations of current tools in practice. BMC Med Educ 2009, 9:53. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Del Mar C, Glasziou P, Mayer D: Teaching evidence based medicine. BMJ 2004, 329:989.
• [8]Coomarasamy A, Khan K: What is the evidence that postgraduate teaching in evidence based medicine changes anything? A systematic review BMJ 2004, 329:1017.
• [9]Ilic D, Maloney S: Methods of teaching medical trainees Evidence Based Medicine: A systematic review. Med Educ 2014, 48:124-35.
• [10]Masie E: Blended learning: the magic is in the mix. In The ASTD e-learning handbook. Edited by Rossett A. McGraw-Hill, New York; 2002.
• [11]Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R: Learning styles. Concepts Evid Psychol Sci Public Interest 2008, 9:105-19.
• [12]Grasl M, Pokieser P, Gleiss A, Brandstaetter J, Sigmund T, Erovic B, et al.: A new blended learning concept for medical students in otolaryngology. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012, 138:358-66.
• [13]Lehmann R, Bosse H, Simon A, Nikendei C, Huwendiek S: An innovative blended learning approach using virtual patients as preparation for skills laboratory training: perceptions of students and tutors. BMC Med Educ 2013, 13:23. BioMed Central Full Text
• [14]Woltering V, Herrler A, Spitzer K, Spreckelsen C: Blended learning positively affects students’ satisfaction and the role of the tutor in the problem-based learning process: results of a mixed-method evaluation. Adv Health Sci Educ 2009, 14:725-38.
• [15]Tashakkori A, Creswell J: Designing and conducting mixed methods research. J Mixed Methods Res 2007, 1:3-8.
• [16]Ilic D, Bin Nordin R, Glasziou P, Tilson J, Villanueva E: Implementation of a blended learning approach to teaching evidence based practice: a protocol for a mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ 2013, 13:170. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Monash University. Evidence Based Practice [internet]. Available at; http://guides.lib.monash.edu/medicine.
• [18]Ilic, D. Year3EBCP [internet] Available at; http://www.youtube.com/user/Year3EBCP.
• [19]Fritsche L, Greenhalgh T, Falck-Ytter Y, Neumayer H, Kunz R: Do short courses in evidence based medicine improve knowledge and skills? Validation of Berlin questionnaire and before and after study of courses in evidence based medicine. BMJ 2002, 325:1338-41.
• [20]Ilic D, Bin Nordin R, Glasziou P, Tilson J, Villanueva E: Development and validation of the ACE tool: assessing medical trainees’ competency in evidence based medicine. BMC Med Educ 2014, 14:114. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Upton D, Upton P: Development of an evidence-based practice questionnaire for nurses. J Adv Nurs 2006, 53:454-8.
• [22]Silverman D: Qualitative Research: Theory, method and practices. SAGE Publications, London; 2004.
• [23]Liamputtong P: Research methods in health. Foundations for evidence-based practice. Oxford University Press, South Melbourne; 2010.
• [24]Braun V, Clarke V: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006, 3:77-101.
• [25]Astin J, Jenkins T, Moore L: Medical students’ perspective on the teaching of medical statistics in the undergraduate medical curriculum. Stat Med 2002, 21:1003-6.
• [26]Hadley J, Wall D, Khan K: Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities. BMC Med Educ 2007, 7:11. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Bradley P, Oterholt C, Nordheim L, Bjorndal A: Medical students’ and tutors’ experiences of directed and self-directed learning programs in Evidence-Based Medicine: A qualitative evaluation accompanying a randomized controlled trial. Eval Rev 2005, 29:149-77.
• [28]Dorsch J, Aiyer M, Meyer L: Impact of an evidence-based medicine curriculum on medical students’ attitudes and skills. J Med Libr Assoc 2004, 92:397-406.
• [29]Glasziou P, Heneghan C: The paths from research to improved health outcomes. Evidence Based Nursing 2005, 8:36-8.
• [30]Ilic D, Forbes K: Undergraduate medical student perceptions and use of Evidence Based Medicine: A qualitative study. BMC Med Educ 2010, 10:58. BioMed Central Full Text
• [31]Harris J, Kearley K, Heneghan C, Meats E, Roberts N, Perera R, et al.: Are journal clubs effective in supporting evidence-based decision making? A systematic review. BEME Guide No. 16. Med Teach 2011, 33:9-23.
• [32]Porter S, Umbach P: Student survey response rates across institutions: Why do they vary? Res High Educ 2006, 47:229-47.
• [33]Zendejas B, Wang A, Brydges R, Hamstra S, Cook D: Cost: the missing outcome in simulation-based medical education research: a systematic review. Surgery 2013, 153:160-76.
• [34]Varkey P, Murad M, Braun C, Grall K, Saoji V: A review of cost-effectiveness, cost-containment and economics curricula in graduate medical education. J Eval Clin Pract 2010, 16:1055-62.