Carrero E J, Gomar C, Fábregas N, Penzo W, Castillo J, Villalonga A
Servicio de Anestesiología y Reanimación, Hospital Clínic, Universidad de Barcelona.
Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2008 Apr;55(4):202-9. doi: 10.1016/s0034-9356(08)70550-4.
The efficacy of continuing medical education in anesthesiology has been examined very little. This study compared the efficacy of a lecture on air embolism to that of a class that used a problem/case-based learning approach.
Prospective, randomized study enrolling 52 experienced anesthesiologists participating in a professional development course. Twenty-six anesthesiologists attended a lecture on air embolism in anesthesia and 25 attended a problem-based class. The objectives were the same for both groups and had been defined previously. The participants' knowledge was evaluated before and after the instruction with tests based on 2 cases dealing with the same knowledge areas: risk factors and symptoms, diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment.
No significant between-group differences were found for any of the knowledge areas before or after the classes. After instruction, participants who listened to the lecture improved their scores for knowledge of monitoring (P = .03) and treatment (P = .001). Participants in the problem-based learning group also improved their scores for knowledge of treatment (P = .003).
No between-group differences in participants' knowledge outcomes were detected; improvements were minimal. The study design allowed the knowledge acquired to be evaluated objectively.
麻醉学继续医学教育的效果很少得到研究。本研究比较了关于空气栓塞的讲座与采用基于问题/案例学习方法的课程的效果。
一项前瞻性随机研究，纳入52名参加专业发展课程的经验丰富的麻醉医师。26名麻醉医师参加了关于麻醉中空气栓塞的讲座，25名参加了基于问题的课程。两组的目标相同且先前已确定。在教学前后，通过基于2个涉及相同知识领域（危险因素和症状、诊断、监测和治疗）的案例的测试对参与者的知识进行评估。
课程前后，在任何知识领域均未发现显著的组间差异。授课后，听讲座的参与者在监测知识（P = 0.03）和治疗知识（P = 0.001）方面的得分有所提高。基于问题学习组的参与者在治疗知识方面的得分也有所提高（P = 0.003）。
未检测到参与者知识结果的组间差异；改善程度很小。该研究设计能够客观地评估所获得的知识。
