Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Med Educ. 2017 May;51(5):469-479. doi: 10.1111/medu.13234. Epub 2017 Mar 14.
There is increasing focus on how health care professionals can be trained effectively in quality improvement and patient safety principles. The morbidity and mortality round (MMR) has often been used as a tool with which to examine and teach care quality, yet little is known of its implementation and educational outcomes.
The objectives of this scoping review are to examine and summarise the literature on how the MMR is designed and delivered, and to identify how it is evaluated for effectiveness in addressing medical education outcomes.
A literature search of the PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycInfo and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for articles published from 1980 to 1 June 2016. Publications in English describing the design, implementation and evaluation of MMRs were included. A total of 67 studies were identified, including eight survey-based studies, four literature reviews, one ethnographic study, three opinion papers, two qualitative observation studies and 49 case studies of education programmes with or without formal evaluation. Study outcomes were categorised using Donald Moore's framework for the evaluation of continuing medical education (CME).
There is much heterogeneity within the literature regarding the implementation, delivery and goals of the MMR. Common design components included explicit programme goals and objectives, the case selection process, case presentation models and some form of case analysis. Evaluation of CME outcomes for MMR were mainly limited to learner participation, satisfaction and self-assessed changes in knowledge.
The MMR is widely utilised as an educational tool to promote medical education, patient safety and quality improvement. Although evidence to guide the design and implementation of the MMR to achieve measurable CME outcomes remains limited, there are components associated with positive improvements to learning and performance outcomes.
越来越关注如何有效地培训医疗保健专业人员在质量改进和患者安全原则方面的专业知识。发病率和死亡率轮(MMR)通常被用作检查和教授护理质量的工具,但对其实施和教育结果却知之甚少。
本研究的目的是检查和总结有关 MMR 的设计和实施的文献,并确定如何评估其在解决医学教育成果方面的有效性。
对 PubMed、MEDLINE、PsycInfo 和 Cochrane Library 数据库进行了文献检索,检索时间从 1980 年至 2016 年 6 月 1 日。纳入了描述 MMR 设计、实施和评估的英文出版物。共确定了 67 项研究,包括 8 项基于调查的研究、4 项文献综述、1 项民族志研究、3 项观点论文、2 项定性观察研究和 49 项具有或不具有正式评估的教育计划案例研究。使用唐纳德·摩尔(Donald Moore)的继续教育(CME)评估框架对研究结果进行了分类。
文献中关于 MMR 的实施、交付和目标存在很大的异质性。常见的设计组成部分包括明确的计划目标和目的、案例选择过程、案例呈现模型和某种形式的案例分析。对 MMR 的 CME 结果进行评估主要限于学习者的参与、满意度和自我评估的知识变化。
MMR 被广泛用作促进医学教育、患者安全和质量改进的教育工具。尽管指导 MMR 的设计和实施以实现可衡量的 CME 结果的证据仍然有限,但有一些组件与学习和绩效结果的积极改善相关。