Greenhalgh T, Douglas H R
Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Royal Free and University College Medical School London.
Br J Gen Pract. 1999 Jul;49(444):536-40.
Clinical governance will require general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses (PNs) to become competent in finding, appraising, and implementing research evidence--the skills of evidence-based health care (EBHC).
To report the experiences of GPs and PNs in training in this area.
We held 30 in-depth, semi-structured interviews throughout North Thames region with three groups of informants: primary care practitioners recruited from the mailing lists of established EBHC courses; organizers and teachers on these courses; and educational advisers from Royal Colleges, universities, and postgraduate departments. Detailed qualitative analysis was undertaken to identify themes from each of these interview groups.
At the time of the fieldwork for this study (late 1997), remarkably few GPs or PNs had attended any formal EBHC courses in our region. Perceived barriers to attendance on courses included inconsistency in marketing terminology, cultural issues (e.g. EBHC being perceived as one aspect of rapid and unwanted change in the workplace), lack of confidence in the subject matter (especially mathematics and statistics), lack of time, and practical and financial constraints. Our interviews suggested, however, that the principles and philosophy of EBHC are beginning to permeate traditional lecture-based continuing medical education courses, and consultant colleagues increasingly seek to make their advice 'evidence based'.
We offer some preliminary recommendations for the organizers of EBHC courses for primary care. These include offering a range of flexible training, being explicit about course content, recognizing differences in professional culture between primary and secondary care and between doctors and nurses, and addressing issues of funding and accreditation at national level. Introducing EBHC through traditional topic-based postgraduate teaching programmes may be more acceptable and more effective than providing dedicated courses in its theoretical principles.
临床治理要求全科医生(GPs)和执业护士(PNs)具备查找、评估和应用研究证据的能力——即循证医疗保健(EBHC)技能。
报告全科医生和执业护士在该领域培训的经历。
我们在北泰晤士地区对三组受访者进行了30次深入的半结构化访谈:从既定的循证医疗保健课程邮件列表中招募的基层医疗从业者;这些课程的组织者和教师;以及皇家医学院、大学和研究生部门的教育顾问。进行了详细的定性分析,以确定每个访谈组的主题。
在本研究的实地调查时(1997年末),在我们地区,参加过任何正式循证医疗保健课程的全科医生或执业护士少之又少。参加课程的感知障碍包括营销术语不一致、文化问题(例如,循证医疗保健被视为工作场所快速且不受欢迎的变化的一个方面)、对主题缺乏信心(尤其是数学和统计学)、缺乏时间以及实际和财务限制。然而,我们的访谈表明,循证医疗保健的原则和理念开始渗透到传统的以讲座为主的继续医学教育课程中,顾问同事越来越多地寻求使其建议“基于证据”。
我们为基层医疗循证医疗保健课程的组织者提供了一些初步建议。这些建议包括提供一系列灵活的培训、明确课程内容、认识到初级和二级医疗之间以及医生和护士之间专业文化的差异,以及在国家层面解决资金和认证问题。通过传统的基于主题的研究生教学计划引入循证医疗保健可能比专门开设其理论原则课程更可接受且更有效。