St Edmund's College, Cambridge, UK.
Med Educ. 2010 Apr;44(4):412-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03620.x.
The profession of medicine has long been characterised by virtues such as authorisation, specialisation, autonomy, self-regulation and adherence to an ethical code of practice, and its complexity has granted it the privilege of self-regulation. Studies have shown continuing professional development (CPD) for general practitioners (GPs) to be most effective when it is set up within a multi-method design. This paper reports a research-based evaluation of a 2-year educational CPD project for 21 GPs.
The project focused on the issue of 'children in need' and was delivered through group supervision, teaching days, an e-portfolio, literature, newsletters and a desk checklist. A mixed-methods evaluation design was used.
The GPs demonstrated an overall preference for supervision as an authentic method for self-directed professional development because it facilitated the creation of a common platform for relevant and useful knowledge in the context of general practice. Other methods were perceived as less valuable for GPs' CPD.
The results suggest that general practitioners need to establish a common platform of shared experiences before engaging in multi-professional CPD. Participation in the supervision allowed the three groups of GPs to develop their professional skills, but left them with a desire for more training in establishing cooperative practices with their partners in care. The professional challenges discussed during the supervision sessions were important elements of the national GP Curriculum, but not all elements of professionalism were covered.
医学专业长期以来以授权、专业化、自治、自我监管和遵守职业道德规范为特征,其复杂性使其享有自我监管的特权。研究表明,对于全科医生(GP)来说,当继续教育(CPD)采用多方法设计时,效果最佳。本文报告了对 21 名全科医生进行为期 2 年的教育 CPD 项目的基于研究的评估。
该项目专注于“有需要的儿童”问题,通过小组监督、教学日、电子档案、文献、通讯和办公桌清单来实施。采用混合方法评估设计。
全科医生总体上更喜欢监督作为自我指导专业发展的真实方法,因为它在全科医学背景下为相关和有用的知识创造了共同的平台。其他方法被认为对 GP 的 CPD 价值较低。
结果表明,全科医生需要在参与多专业 CPD 之前建立共同的共享经验平台。参与监督使三组全科医生发展了他们的专业技能,但他们渴望在与护理伙伴建立合作实践方面接受更多培训。监督会议中讨论的专业挑战是国家全科医生课程的重要组成部分,但并非涵盖了所有专业元素。