Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Aim: To describe the various teaching and learning modalities for the delivery of Continuing Professional Development activities for health care professionals in the long-term care sector.
Background: Continuing Professional Development is a key activity that organisations undertake to achieve effective workforce planning, recruitment, retention and upskilling strategies in long-term care settings. During the Covid-19 pandemic there was a rapid move to online modalities of Continuous Professional Development, but there is a paucity of evidence in relation to their effectiveness compared with face-to-face, or in-class learning.
Design: A rapid synthesis review.
Methods: MEDLINE, CINAHL and HEALTH BUSINESS ELITE databases were used to identify relevant articles that were published between 2016 and 2022. Original studies of any design investigating Continuing Professional Development activities, with or without a comparison between interventions or activities were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was followed. The Kirkpatrick model was adopted as a globally recognised method for evaluating training programmes.
Results: After a full text analysis, 34 papers were included in the review. Face to face was the most common method of delivery followed by online, while blended (a mix of face-to-face and online delivery) was the least common method used. The teaching modalities were not associated with specific learning contents, but were used for a range of content. Most studies obtained positive outcomes following implementation of the educational interventions. Kirkpatrick Level 4 (results) was the most commonly measured outcome.
Conclusions: While blended learning was the least common method of delivery, it was found to be more beneficial for learners than face-to-face or online exclusively. There are now new spaces to learn and new technologies that allow us to 'reimagine' where, when and how we teach. This requires Continuing Professional Development providers to design and tailor their courses according to health professionals' learning needs and the clinical contexts where they work. We recommend that Continuing Professional Development providers involve employers when designing teaching and learning activities for Long Term Care workers, to decide which modalities enable effective knowledge translation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2023.103638 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!