Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2018 Sep 24;18(1):219.
doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1328-6.

E-learning for self-management support: introducing blended learning for graduate students - a cohort study

Virginia Munro  1 , Andrea Morello  2 , Candice Oster  2 , Christine Redmond  3 , Anna Vnuk  4 , Sheila Lennon  3 , Sharon Lawn  2
Affiliations
Comparative Study

E-learning for self-management support: introducing blended learning for graduate students - a cohort study

Virginia Munro et al. BMC Med Educ. .

Abstract

Background: E-learning allows delivery of education in many diverse settings and researchers have demonstrated it can be as effective as learning conducted in traditional face-to-face settings. However, there are particular practices and skills needed in the area of providing patient self-management support (SMS), that may not be achievable online. The aim of this study was to compare three approaches in the training of university students regarding the preparation of a Chronic Condition Self-Management Care Plan: 1) traditional face-to-face delivery of SMS training, 2) an e-learning approach and 3) a blended approach (combining e-learning and face-to-face teaching).

Methods: Graduate entry physiotherapy students and medical students at Flinders University were recruited. Depending on the cohort, students were either exposed to traditional face-to-face training, e-learning or a blended model. Outcomes were compared between the three groups. We measured adherence to care plan processes in the preparation of an assessment piece using the Flinders Program Chronic Care Self Management tools. A total of 183 care plans were included (102 traditional, 52 blended, 29 e-learning,). All students submitted the Flinders Program Chronic Care Plan for university assessment and these were later assessed for quality by researchers. The submission was also assigned a consumer engagement score and a global competence score as these are integral to successful delivery of SMS and represent the patient perspective.

Results: The blended group performed significantly better than the traditional group in quality use of the Flinders Program tools: Problem and Goals (P < 0.0001). They also performed significantly better in the total care plan score (P < 0.0001) and engagement score (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between the groups for the Partners in Health tool.

Conclusions: In this pilot study, the blended learning model was a more effective method for teaching self-management skills than the traditional group, as assessed in the development of a chronic condition self-management care plan. We anticipate that future research with identical groups of students would yield similar results but in the meantime, academics can have confidence that blended learning is at least as effective as traditional learning methods.

Keywords: Blended learning; Chronic care; E-learning; Person-centred care; Self-management; Self-management support; Virtual learning.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by both the Flinders University Social Behavioural Research Ethics Committee (6921) and the Flinders University Research and Evaluation Expert Reference Group (5.15). Ethical approval was provided retrospectively for the both the 2014 and 2015 cohort of medical and physiotherapy students.

On the basis of advice from the Ethics committee and the possible concern raised that the student cohort may feel obliged and/or pressured to participate if their participation was sought prior to completion of assessment we sought retrospective data. We did this by sending the participant information sheet and consent form to all students enrolled in the cohort via their student email once all teaching and assessment was completed to avoid any potential for coercion.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

    1. Quail M, Brundage SB, Spitalnick J, Allen PJ, Beilby J. Student self-reported communication skills, knowledge and confidence across standardised patient, virtual and traditional clinical learning environments. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16:73. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0577-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S, Dupras DM, Erwin PJ. Internet-based learning in the health professions: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2008;300:1181–1196. doi: 10.1001/jama.300.10.1181. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Makransky G, Bonde MT, Wulff JSG, Wandall J, Hood M, Creed PA, et al. Simulation based virtual learning environment in medical genetics counseling: an example of bridging the gap between theory and practice in medical education. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16:98. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0620-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance. Ann Surg. 2002;236:458–464. doi: 10.1097/00000658-200210000-00008. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen ER, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A meta-analytic comparative review of the evidence. Acad. Med. J. Assoc. Am. Med. Coll. 2011;86:706–711. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318217e119. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources