Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://mnclhd.intersearch.com.au/mnclhdjspui/handle/123456789/410
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Shakespeare, T. P. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Mukherjee, R. K. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lu, J. J. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, K. M. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Back, M. F. | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2025-01-14T23:10:36Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2025-01-14T23:10:36Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2005 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Cancer Education. 2005 Winter;20(4):216-21. doi: 10.1207/s15430154jce2004_9. | en |
dc.identifier.uri | https://mnclhd.intersearch.com.au/mnclhdjspui/handle/123456789/410 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Meta-analyses demonstrate audit with feedback (AWF) is effective continuing medical education (CME). However, efficacy varies between specialties, with little published radiation oncologist (RO)-specific evidence. We evaluated an AWF CME intervention for ROs determining efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and participant satisfaction. Methods: CME program: The CME incorporated fortnightly random patient chart audit, scoring management adequacy via a checklist. Scores were presented at a same-day institutional meeting, and case management discussed. Senior peers provided individualized, educational feedback. Evaluation: Changes in behavior and performance were evaluated by chart review of new patients seen by ROs in the 2 months before commencement of AWF (T0), and at months 13-14 of the program (T1). Behavior and performance were evaluated with a validated, reproducible, 19-item instrument. Criteria for each case audited included 10 targeted and 3 nontargeted behavior items and 6 performance items; each scored 1 point if deemed adequate (maximum score 19). Cost-effectiveness was reported as cost to the institution per item point gained. The mean score (out of 5) of a 14-item questionnaire evaluated program perception. Results: A total of 113 and 118 charts were evaluated at T0 and T1, respectively. Mean score of targeted behavior improved between T0 and T1 (from 8.7 to 9.2 out of 10, P = .0001), with no significant improvement of nontargeted behavior/performance items. Annual costs and cost-per-point gained were US 7,897 dollars and 15 dollars. Participant satisfaction was positive, increasing after efficacy result distribution (P = .0001). Conclusion: Audit with comparative, individualized, educational feedback is cost-effective and positively perceived CME, significantly improving targeted RO behavior. Oncologists' CME design and evaluation require further research. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.subject | Radiation Oncologists | en |
dc.subject | Education, Medical, Continuing | en |
dc.subject | Feedback | en |
dc.title | Evaluation of an audit with feedback continuing medical education program for radiation oncologists | en |
dc.type | Article | en |
dc.contributor.mnclhdauthor | Shakespeare, Thomas P. | - |
Appears in Collections: | Oncology / Cancer |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.