Effects of online continuing medical education on perspectives of shared decision-making among Chinese endocrinologists

被引:0
|
作者
Yang, Hongbo [1 ]
Chen, Shi [1 ]
Zhao, Nan [2 ]
Zhou, Xiang [1 ]
Cui, Lijia [1 ]
Xia, Weibo [1 ]
Li, Yuxiu [1 ]
Zhu, Huijuan [1 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Peking Union Med Coll Hosp, Dept Endocrinol, Key Lab Endocrinol Natl Hlth Commiss, Beijing 100730, Peoples R China
[2] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Peking Union Med Coll Hosp, Med Res Ctr, State Key Lab Complex Severe & Rare Dis, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
Shared decision-making; Perspective; Endocrinology; National survey; Continued medical education; BARRIERS; CARE;
D O I
10.1186/s12909-023-04838-5
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Background Shared decision-making (SDM) may influence the clinical outcomes of patients with endocrine disorders. There are few studies describing perspectives towards SDM among endocrinologists in China.Methods In the first stage, we conducted a national survey using an online questionnaire about SDM among endocrinologists in China. The national survey focused on attitude and propensity, potential barriers, and the effectiveness of SDM implementation strategies. In the second stage, survey participants were further recruited to participate in a prospective cohort study in the online continuing medical education (CME) program of Peking Union Medical College Hospital in Beijing. The Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-Doc) was employed to assess the effects of online CME on physicians' perspectives during the process of SDM, which was conducted before and after the CME course was provided.Results In the national survey, 280 endocrinologists (75.7% female, mean age 38.0 +/- 4.5 years, 62.5% with a duration of practice of more than ten years) completed the questionnaire. Participants had a generally positive attitude towards SDM in clinical practice. The main perceived barriers included time consumption, information inequality between doctors and patients, and a lack of technical support and training for SDM. The main uncertainties of implementation steps included inviting patients to participate in SDM (16.3%), assisting in decision-making (15.3%), facilitating deliberation and decision-making (13.7%), and providing information on benefits and risks (12.6%). Of the physicians who participated in the national survey, 84 registered for the eight-day online CME course. The SDM-Q-Doc score increased from 87.3 +/- 18.2 at baseline to 93.0 +/- 9.3 at the end of the 8-day online CME training (p = 0.003, paired t test). The participants' age, sex, education level, practice duration, the annual number of patients with rare endocrine diseases, and the annual number of patients requiring MDT or CME were not significantly related to increased SDM-Q-Doc scores after online CME (all p > 0.05).Conclusions Chinese endocrinologists had a generally positive attitude towards SDM in clinical practice. There were also several uncertainties in the implementation steps of SDM. Regardless of a physician's educational background or prior professional experience, CME may help to improve their perspectives regarding SDM.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Quantifying the Risks and Benefits of Continuing Labor Induction: Data for Shared Decision-Making
    Teal, Elizabeth Nicole
    Lewkowitz, Adam K.
    Koser, Sarah L. P.
    Tran, Carol B. N.
    Gaw, Stephanie L.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2021, 38 (09) : 935 - 943
  • [42] Institutional constraints on strategic maneuvering in shared medical decision-making
    Henkemans, A. Francisca Snoeck
    Mohammed, Dima
    JOURNAL OF ARGUMENTATION IN CONTEXT, 2012, 1 (01) : 19 - 32
  • [43] Does the use of shared decision-making consultation behaviors increase treatment decision-making satisfaction among Chinese women facing decision for breast cancer surgery?
    Lam, Wendy W. T.
    Kwok, Marie
    Chan, Miranda
    Hung, Wai Ka
    Ying, Marcus
    Or, Amy
    Kwong, Ava
    Suen, Dacita
    Yoon, Sungwon
    Fielding, Richard
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2014, 94 (02) : 243 - 249
  • [44] Rethinking informed consent: The case for shared medical decision-making
    Staples King, Jaime
    Moulton, Benjamin W.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF LAW & MEDICINE, 2006, 32 (04) : 429 - 501
  • [45] The Chinese version of OPTION scale: Is it reliable on measuring the shared decision-making among preoperative conversations
    Zhang, Fan
    Wang, Qingyan
    Liu, Xinchun
    Zhang, Yi
    Liu, Huaqing
    Yin, Meng
    Zhao, Ya
    Tie, Bingyu
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2021, 104 (12) : 3032 - 3037
  • [46] Feasibility of a randomised trial of a continuing medical education program in shared decision-making on the use of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections in primary care: the DECISION+ pilot trial
    Annie LeBlanc
    France Légaré
    Michel Labrecque
    Gaston Godin
    Robert Thivierge
    Claudine Laurier
    Luc Côté
    Annette M O'Connor
    Michel Rousseau
    Implementation Science, 6
  • [47] Feasibility of a randomised trial of a continuing medical education program in shared decision-making on the use of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections in primary care: the DECISION plus pilot trial
    LeBlanc, Annie
    Legare, France
    Labrecque, Michel
    Godin, Gaston
    Thivierge, Robert
    Laurier, Claudine
    Cote, Luc
    O'Connor, Annette M.
    Rousseau, Michel
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2011, 6
  • [48] Improving shared decision-making in adolescents through antibiotic education
    Ngadimon, I. W.
    Islahudin, F.
    Shah, N. Mohamed
    Hatah, E. Md
    Makmor-Bakry, M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACY, 2017, 39 (01) : 120 - 125
  • [49] Improving shared decision-making in adolescents through antibiotic education
    I. W. Ngadimon
    F. Islahudin
    N. Mohamed Shah
    E. Md. Hatah
    M. Makmor-Bakry
    International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 2017, 39 : 120 - 125
  • [50] Learning values in shared decision-making in undergraduate paramedic education
    Eaton, Georgette
    JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2019, 25 (06) : 1094 - 1101