Associations between teaching effectiveness scores and characteristics of presentations in hospital medicine continuing education

Learner engagement and teaching effectiveness in livestreamed versus in-person CME

INTRODUCTION

Engaging learners in continuing medical education (CME) is challenging. Recently, CME courses have transitioned to livestreamed CME, with learners viewing live, in-person courses online. The authors aimed to (1) compare learner engagement and teaching effectiveness in livestreamed with in-person CME and (2) determine how livestream engagement and teaching effectiveness is associated with (A) interactivity metrics, (B) presentation characteristics and (C) medical knowledge.

METHODS

A 3-year, non-randomised study of in-person and livestream CME was performed. The course was in-person for 2018 but transitioned to livestream for 2020 and 2021. Learners completed the Learner Engagement Inventory and Teaching Effectiveness Instrument after each presentation. Both instruments were supported by content, internal structure and relations to other variables' validity evidence. Interactivity metrics included learner use of audience response, questions asked by learners and presentation views. Presentation characteristics included presentations using audience response, using pre/post-test format, time of day and words per slide. Medical knowledge was assessed by audience response. A repeated measures analysis of variance (anova) was used for comparisons and a mixed model approach for correlations.

RESULTS

A total of 159 learners (response rate 27%) completed questionnaires. Engagement did not significantly differ between in-person or livestream CME. (4.56 versus 4.53, p = 0.64, maximum 5 = highly engaged). However, teacher effectiveness scores were higher for in-person compared with livestream (4.77 versus 4.71 p = 0.01, maximum 5 = highly effective). For livestreamed courses, learner engagement was associated with presentation characteristics, including presentation using of audience response (yes = 4.57, no = 4.45, p < .0001), use of a pre/post-test (yes = 4.62, no = 4.54, p < .0001) and time of presentation (morning = 4.58, afternoon = 4.53, p = .0002). Significant associations were not seen for interactivity metrics or medical knowledge.

DISCUSSION

Livestreaming may be as engaging as in-person CME. Although teaching effectiveness in livestreaming was lower, this difference was small. CME course planners should consider offering livestream CME while exploring strategies to enhance teaching effectiveness in livestreamed settings.

Effect of Pause Procedures on Participant Reflection and Commitment-to-Change in Continuing Medical Education

Problem: Conferences are the most common form of continuing medical education (CME), but their effect on clinician practice is inconsistent. Reflection is a critical step in the process of practice change among clinicians and may lead to improved outcomes following conference-based CME. However, reflection requires time to process newly-learned material. Adequate time for reflection may be noticeably absent during many conference presentations. Intervention: The pause procedure is a 90-second 'pause' during a 30-minute presentation so learners can review and discuss content. The goal of the pause procedure is to stimulate learners' active engagement with newly learned material which will, in turn, promote learner reflection. Context: Fifty-six presentations at two hospital medicine CME conferences were assigned to the pause procedure or control. Study outcomes provided by conference participants were validated reflection scores and commitment-to-change (CTC) statements for each presentation. A post-hoc survey of the intervention group was conducted to assess presenters' experiences with the pause procedure. Impact: A total of 527 conference participants completed presentation evaluations (response rate 72.7%). Presentations incorporating the pause procedure failed to lead higher participant reflection scores (percentage 'top box' score; intervention: 39.2% vs. control: 41.7%, p = 0.40) or participant CTC rates (median [IQR]; intervention: 4.64 [3.04, 10.57] vs. control: 8.16 [5.28, 17.12], p = 0.13) than control presentations. However, the majority of presenters (16 out of 17 survey respondents) had never before used the intervention and little active engagement among learners was noted during the pause procedure. Lessons Learned: Adding the pause procedure to CME presentations did not lead to greater reflection or CTC among clinician learners. However, presenters had limited experience with the intervention, which may have reduced their fidelity to the educational principles of the pause procedure. Faculty development may be necessary when planning a new educational intervention that is to be implemented by conference presenters.

Characteristics of Effective Continuing Medical Education for Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners in Hospital Medicine

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to describe participant characteristics and effective teaching methods at a national continuing medical education (CME) conference on hospital medicine for physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs).

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, participants provided demographic information and teaching effectiveness scores for each presentation. Associations between teaching effectiveness score and presentation characteristics were determined.

RESULTS

In total, 163 of 253 participants (64.4%) completed evaluations of 28 presentations. Many of the participants were younger than 50 years (69.0%), had practiced for fewer than 5 years (41.5%), and worked in nonacademic settings (76.7%). Teaching effectiveness scores were significantly associated with the use of clinical cases (perfect scores for 68.8% of presentations with clinical cases vs. 59.8% without; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Many PAs and NPs at an HM CME conference were early-career clinicians working in nonacademic settings. Presenters at CME conferences in hospital medicine should consider using clinical cases to improve their teaching effectiveness among PA and NP learners.

Validation of a Teaching Effectiveness Assessment in Psychiatry Continuing Medical Education

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about factors associated with effective continuing medical education (CME) in psychiatry. The authors aimed to validate a method to assess psychiatry CME teaching effectiveness and to determine associations between teaching effectiveness scores and characteristics of presentations, presenters, and participants.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted at the Mayo Clinic Psychiatry Clinical Reviews and Psychiatry in Medical Settings. Presentations were evaluated using an eight-item CME teaching effectiveness instrument, its content based on previously published instruments. Factor analysis, internal consistency and interrater reliabilities, and temporal stability reliability were calculated. Associations were determined between teaching effectiveness scores and characteristics of presentations, presenters, and participants.

RESULTS

In total, 364 participants returned 246 completed surveys (response rate, 67.6%). Factor analysis revealed a unidimensional model of psychiatry CME teaching effectiveness. Cronbach α for the instrument was excellent at 0.94. Item mean score (SD) ranged from 4.33 (0.92) to 4.71 (0.59) on a 5-point scale. Overall interrater reliability was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75-0.91), and temporal stability was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.77-0.97). No associations were found between teaching effectiveness scores and characteristics of presentations, presenters, and participants.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a new, validated measure of CME teaching effectiveness that could be used to improve psychiatry CME. In contrast to prior research in other medical specialties, CME teaching effectiveness scores were not associated with use of case-based or interactive presentations. This outcome suggests the need for distinctive considerations regarding psychiatry CME; a singular approach to CME teaching may not apply to all medical specialties.

Associations between teaching effectiveness and participant self-reflection in continuing medical education

Effective medical educators can engage learners through self-reflection. However, little is known about the relationships between teaching effectiveness and self-reflection in continuing medical education (CME). We aimed to determine associations between presenter teaching effectiveness and participant self-reflection in conference-based CME. This cross-sectional study evaluated presenters and participants at a national CME course. Participants provided CME teaching effectiveness (CMETE) ratings and self-reflection scores for each presentation. Overall CMETE and CME self-reflection scores (five-point Likert scale with one as strongly disagree and five as strongly agree) were averaged for each presentation. Correlations were measured among self-reflection, CMETE, and presentation characteristics. In total, 624 participants returned 430 evaluations (response, 68.9%) for the 38 presentations. Correlation between CMETE and self-reflection was medium (Pearson correlation, 0.3-0.5) or large (0.5-1.0) for most presentations (n = 33, 86.9%). Higher mean (SD) CME reflection scores were associated with clinical cases (3.66 [0.12] vs. 3.48 [0.14]; p = 0.003) and audience response (3.66 [0.12] vs. 3.51 [0.14]; p = 0.005). To our knowledge, this is the first study to show a relationship between teaching effectiveness and participant self-reflection in conference-based CME. Presenters should consider using clinical cases and audience response systems to increase teaching effectiveness and promote self-reflection among CME learners.

Relationships Between Reflection and Behavior Change in CME

INTRODUCTION

Reflection exposes performance gaps and is a step in the process of behavior change among adult learners. However, little is known about the relationships between reflection and behavior change in CME. Our objectives were to measure associations between validated reflection scores and behavior change among CME participants and to identify associations between reflection and characteristics of CME presentations.

METHODS

This was a cohort study of attendees at a national hospital medicine CME course. Participants provided reflection scores for each presentation and planned commitment-to-change (CTC) statements at the conclusion of the course. Reflection scores from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) were averaged for each presentation. CTC statements were linked to their accompanying presentations. A 3-month postcourse survey was conducted to assess if planned CTCs were successfully implemented.

RESULTS

In all, 223 of 281 participants (79.4%) returned evaluations. Of the 195 planned CTC statements available for postcourse analysis, 128 (65.6%) were implemented. Reflection scores correlated with the number of planned CTC statements across all presentations (Pearson correlation, 0.65; P < .001). In addition, higher reflection scores (mean [SD]) were associated with the presence of audience response opportunities (Yes: 4.13 [0.18] versus No: 3.96 [0.16]; P = .01) and the use of clinical cases (Yes: 4.09 [0.18] versus No: 3.86 [0.12]; P < .01).

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to show a relationship between participant reflection and CTC in conference-based CME. Presentations that incorporate clinical cases and audience response systems seem to stimulate participant reflection and behavior change.

Use of the pause procedure in continuing medical education: A randomized controlled intervention study

During lectures, a pause procedure (the presenter pauses so students can discuss content) can improve educational outcomes. We aimed to determine whether (1) continuing medical education (CME) presentations with a pause procedure were evaluated more favorably and (2) a pause procedure improved recall. In this randomized controlled intervention study of all participants (N = 214) at the Mayo Clinic Internal Medicine Board Review course, 48 lectures were randomly assigned to an intervention (pause procedure) or control (traditional lecture) group. The pause procedure was a 1-min pause at the middle and end of the presentation. Study outcomes were (1) presentation evaluation instrument scores and (2) number of recalled items per lecture. A total of 214 participants returned 145 surveys (response rate, 68%). Mean presentation evaluation scores were significantly higher for pause procedure than for traditional presentations (70.9% vs 65.8%; 95%CI for the difference, 3.5-6.7; p < .0001). Mean number of rapid recall items was higher for pause procedure presentations (0.68 vs 0.59; 95%CI for the difference, 0.02-0.14; p = .01). In a traditional CME course, presentations with a pause procedure had higher evaluation scores and more content was recalled. The pause procedure could arm CME presenters with an easy technique to improve educational content delivery.