Article Text
Abstract
Shared decision-making (SDM) has emerged as a key skill to assist clinicians in applying evidence-based practice (EBP). We aimed to develop and pilot a new approach to teaching EBP, which focuses on teaching knowledge and skills about SDM and pre-appraised evidence. We designed a half-day workshop, informed by an international consensus on EBP core competencies and invited practicing clinicians to participate. Skills in SDM and communicating evidence were assessed by audio-recording consultations between clinicians and standardised patients (immediately pre-workshop and post-workshop). These were rated by two independent assessors using the OPTION (Observing Patient Involvement, 0 to 100 points) and ACEPP (Assessing Communication about Evidence and Patient Preferences, 0 to 5 points) tools. Participants also completed a feedback questionnaire (9 Likert scale and four open-ended questions). Fourteen clinicians participated. Skills in SDM and communicating research evidence improved from pre-workshop to post-workshop (mean increase in OPTION score=5.5, 95% CI 1.0 to 9.9; increase in ACEPP score=0.5, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.06). Participant feedback was positive, with most indicating ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ to the questions. A contemporary approach to teaching clinicians EBP, with a focus on SDM and pre-appraised evidence, was feasible, perceived as useful, and showed modest improvements in skills. Results should be interpreted cautiously because of the small study size and pre-post design.
- MEDICAL EDUCATION & TRAINING
- Protocols & guidelines
- EPIDEMIOLOGY
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors LA, TH and PG conceived the research idea. All authors contributed to the design of the study. LA drafted the original manuscript. All authors contributed to the revision of the paper and approved the final manuscript for submission. LA is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Ethics approval The study was approved by Bond University Human Research Ethics Committee (LA03307).
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request.