Integrating evidence-based teaching into to clinical practice should improve outcomes

Abstract

Data sources: Sources used were Medline, Embase, the Education Resources Information Centre , Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment database, Best Evidence, Best Evidence Medical Education and Science Citation Index, along with reference lists of known systematic reviews.

Study selection: Studies were chosen for inclusion if they evaluated the effects of postgraduate evidence-based medicine (EBM) or critical appraisal teaching in comparison with a control group or baseline before teaching, using a measure of participants' learning achievements or patients' health gains as outcomes.

Data extraction and synthesis: Articles were graded as either level 1 (randomised controlled trials (RCT)) or level 2 (non-randomised studies that either had a comparison with a control group), or a before and after comparison without a control group. Learning achievement was assessed separately for knowledge, critical appraisal skills, attitudes and behaviour. Because of obvious heterogeneity in the features of individual studies, their quality and assessment tools used, a meta-analysis could not be carried out. Conclusions were weighted by methodological quality.

Results: Twenty-three relevant studies were identified, comprising four RCT, seven non-RCT, and 12 before and after comparison studies. Eighteen studies (including two RCT) evaluated a standalone teaching method and five studies (including two RCT) evaluated a clinically integrated teaching method.

Conclusions: Standalone teaching improved knowledge but not skills, attitudes or behaviour. Clinically integrated teaching improved knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviour. Teaching of EBM should be moved from classrooms to clinical practice to achieve improvements in substantial outcomes.