“可验证自学”继续医学教育模式下不同医院超声学科继续医学教育学习内容分析

Analysis of content of continuing medical education learning in ultrasound department of different hospitals under the"verifiable independent study"model of continuing medical education

目的探索在“可验证自学”继续医学教育模式下,三级与二级医院的超声医师继续医学教育学习内容的差异。方法纳入2022年6月至2023年6月北京协和医院40名超声医师,以及北京市第六医院9名超声医师,分别代表三级医院及二级医院超声学科,开展“可验证自学”继续医学教育课题研究。由课题组评估师对纳入医师的学习计划制定是否符合要求进行评估,并依据上报的学习内容和学分认证要求授予相应学分。比较不同医院间目标学分及实际获得学分,并分析不同医院之间学习计划构成及实际学习内容构成。结果两医院超声医师实际获得学分均可达到≥15学分的标准。北京协和医院与北京市第六医院超声医师的目标学分之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),北京协和医院超声医师的实际获得学分明显高于北京市第六医院[(18.8±4.6)vs(15.3±0.5),P<0.001]。北京协和医院超声医师的实际获得学分主要来源为科研相关学习内容,占比58.43%,包括“发表文章”(45.77%)和“科研项目及课题”(12.66%),而北京市第六医院科研相关目标及实际获得学分占比均为0。北京市第六医院超声医师的实际获得学分来源主要为各种形式的线上及线下自主学习。“病例回顾学习”为两医院超声医师的重要目标学分来源,但实际获得学分均明显低于目标学分(北京协和医院为0.64 vs 2.24,北京市第六医院为0 vs 3.72)。结论三级与二级医院的超声医师学分均可达标,但三级与二级医院医师在学习计划制定、学习内容构成方面均具有显著差异,提示继续医学教育模式的更新应充分考虑不同级别医院继续医学教育的需求及实际可完成情况。另外,建议在本学分授予方案的基础上,适当降低学习内容“病例回顾分析”的学分授予难度。

Objective To explore the differences in the continuing medical education content for ultrasound physicians in tertiary and secondary hospitals under the"verifiable independent study"model of continuing medical education.Methods This study included 40 ultrasound physicians from Peking Union Medical College Hospital(referred to as tertiary hospital)and 9 ultrasound physicians from Beijing Sixth Hospital(referred to as secondary hospital)to conduct a one-year practical study named"verifiable independent study"continuing medical education pattern research from June 2022 to June 2023.The evaluators from the research team assessed whether the learning plans developed by the participating physicians met the requirements,and awarded corresponding credits based on the reported learning content and accreditation requirements.The target credits and actual credits obtained between the two hospitals were compared,and the composition of learning plans and actual learning content were analyzed.Results The actual credits obtained by ultrasound physicians from both hospitals met the standard of≥15 credits.There was no statistically significant difference in the target credits between ultrasound physicians from the tertiary hospital and secondary hospital(P>0.05).However,the actual credits obtained by ultrasound physicians from the tertiary hospital were significantly higher than those obtained by ultrasound physicians from the secondary hospital[(18.8±4.6)vs(15.3±0.5),P<0.001].The main source of actual credits for ultrasound physicians from the tertiary hospital was research-related learning content,accounting for 58.43%,including"article publication"(45.77%)and"research projects and topics"(12.66%),while the proportion of research-related target and actual credits obtained by ultrasound physicians from the secondary hospital was 0%.The actual credits obtained by ultrasound physicians from the secondary hospital mainly came from various forms of online and offline autonomous learning."Case review learning"was an important source of target credits for ultrasound physicians from both hospitals,but the actual credits obtained were significantly lower than the target credits(0.64 vs 2.24 for the tertiary hospital and 0 vs 3.72 for the secondary hospital).Conclusion Physicians from both the tertiary and secondary hospitals'can meet the credit requirements.However,there are significant differences in the development of learning plans and the composition of learning content between ultrasound physicians from the two levels of hospitals,indicating that the update of the continuing medical education model should fully consider the needs and actual feasibility of continuing medical education in different levels of hospitals.Additionally,it is recommended to appropriately reduce the difficulty of awarding credits for the learning content of"case review analysis"based on the current credit awarding scheme.