Search

Background: The 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.Methods: In 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.Results: 166 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.Conclusion: A 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 Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36550981. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: E-learning has the potential to provide effective education for general practice, but there are significant difficulties that must be overcome., Design: We initiated a two-round Delphi study, aiming to identify expectations and barriers to e-learning in primary healthcare education., Methods: We distributed questionnaires to 60 primary care experts who are also experts in the field of e-learning. Their responses were independently analysed by two of the authors (J.G., H.C.V.) and were clustered to form 32 themes. These were fed back to the participants in a second postal questionnaire with the objective of reaching agreement or disagreement, with a cut-off of 80%., Results: The response rate was 67% (n=40) in the first and 60% (n=36) in the second round. The extent of agreement reached ranged from 8% ("e-learning is displacing practical teaching and learning") to 97% ("e-learning needs convincing didactical concepts"). Agreement was high with the themes "e-learning gets a new focus by mixed learning concepts" and "users will have a higher level of media competence 5 years from now" (94% each). There was a positive attitude to e-learning, but there was concern about the lack of orientation towards users' needs and the poor development of innovative didactical concepts. In implementing e-learning in primary care, education should be independent of financial influence from the healthcare industry in order to eliminate conflicts of interest., Conclusion: The experts' responses show that e-learning in primary healthcare education can contribute substantially to undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education, and should therefore be evaluated in systematic studies.