981-P: Success of Online CME at Improving Clinical Knowledge, Competence, and Confidence regarding CGM

IF 7.5 1区医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM

Diabetes Pub Date : 2025-06-13 DOI:10.2337/db25-981-p

AMY LARKIN, MICHAEL LACOUTURE, ANNE LE

{"title":"981-P: Success of Online CME at Improving Clinical Knowledge, Competence, and Confidence regarding CGM","authors":"AMY LARKIN, MICHAEL LACOUTURE, ANNE LE","doi":"10.2337/db25-981-p","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and Objective: We sought to determine if online continuing medical education (CME) could improve the clinical knowledge, competence and confidence of primary care physicians (PCPs) and diabetologists/endocrinologists (D/Es) related to CGM. Methods: Intervention was a 45-min online video expert interview series with downloadable slides. Education effect assessed with matched pre-/post-assessment design. A paired samples t-test was conducted for significance testing and a McNemar test was conducted at the question level (5% significance level, P &lt;.05). Confidence was assessed in a Likert scale question. Data collection was May 15, 2024 to July 18, 2024. Results: 191 PCPs and 34 D/Es were included in the study, of which 41% of PCPs and 53% of D/Es improved their knowledge/competence. On a question-level: 15% of both PCPs and D/Es demonstrated improvements at patient selection for use of CGM (P&lt;.05 for PCPs and P=NS for D/Es). 21% of PCPs and 29% of D/Es demonstrated improvements at overcoming barriers to CGM use in a practical scenario (P&lt;.01 for both PCPs and D/Es). 14% of PCPs and 18% of D/Es demonstrated improvements at identifying benefits of CGM (P&lt;.01 for PCPs and P=NS D/Es). 34% of PCPs and 21% of D/Es had a measurable improvement in confidence in initiating CGM (P&lt;.01 for PCPs and P=NS for D/Es). Continued educational gaps include: 61% of PCPs and 56% of D/Es need education on patient selection for CGM use, 50% of PCPs and 56% of D/Es need additional education on overcoming barriers to CGM, and 35% of PCPs need additional education on benefits of CGM. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the success of online CME consisting of an expert interview series on improving clinical knowledge, competence and confidence of both PCPs and D/Es related to CGM use. Significant continued knowledge and competence gaps were identified in both groups, with the largest gaps in knowledge seen in PCPs and competence in D/Es. Disclosure A. Larkin: None. M. LaCouture: None. A. Le: None. Funding Independent educational grant from Abbott Diabetes Care","PeriodicalId":11376,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes","volume":"180 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/db25-981-p","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and Objective: We sought to determine if online continuing medical education (CME) could improve the clinical knowledge, competence and confidence of primary care physicians (PCPs) and diabetologists/endocrinologists (D/Es) related to CGM. Methods: Intervention was a 45-min online video expert interview series with downloadable slides. Education effect assessed with matched pre-/post-assessment design. A paired samples t-test was conducted for significance testing and a McNemar test was conducted at the question level (5% significance level, P <.05). Confidence was assessed in a Likert scale question. Data collection was May 15, 2024 to July 18, 2024. Results: 191 PCPs and 34 D/Es were included in the study, of which 41% of PCPs and 53% of D/Es improved their knowledge/competence. On a question-level: 15% of both PCPs and D/Es demonstrated improvements at patient selection for use of CGM (P<.05 for PCPs and P=NS for D/Es). 21% of PCPs and 29% of D/Es demonstrated improvements at overcoming barriers to CGM use in a practical scenario (P<.01 for both PCPs and D/Es). 14% of PCPs and 18% of D/Es demonstrated improvements at identifying benefits of CGM (P<.01 for PCPs and P=NS D/Es). 34% of PCPs and 21% of D/Es had a measurable improvement in confidence in initiating CGM (P<.01 for PCPs and P=NS for D/Es). Continued educational gaps include: 61% of PCPs and 56% of D/Es need education on patient selection for CGM use, 50% of PCPs and 56% of D/Es need additional education on overcoming barriers to CGM, and 35% of PCPs need additional education on benefits of CGM. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the success of online CME consisting of an expert interview series on improving clinical knowledge, competence and confidence of both PCPs and D/Es related to CGM use. Significant continued knowledge and competence gaps were identified in both groups, with the largest gaps in knowledge seen in PCPs and competence in D/Es. Disclosure A. Larkin: None. M. LaCouture: None. A. Le: None. Funding Independent educational grant from Abbott Diabetes Care

查看原文本刊更多论文

981-P：在线继续教育在提高CGM临床知识、能力和信心方面的成功

前言和目的：我们试图确定在线继续医学教育（CME）是否可以提高初级保健医生（pcp）和糖尿病/内分泌科医生（D/Es）与CGM相关的临床知识、能力和信心。方法：采用45分钟的在线视频专家访谈系列，并附有可下载的幻灯片。教育效果评估采用匹配的前/后评估设计。显著性检验采用配对样本t检验，问题水平采用McNemar检验（5%显著性水平，P < 0.05）。信心以李克特量表评估。数据收集时间为2024年5月15日至2024年7月18日。结果：共纳入191名执业医师和34名D/ e，其中41%的执业医师和53%的D/ e的知识/能力有所提高。在问题层面上：15%的pcp和D/ e在患者选择使用CGM方面表现出改善（P<）。pcp为05，D/ e为P=NS)。21%的pcp和29%的D/ e在实际情况中克服了使用CGM的障碍（P<）。pcp和D/ e均为01)。14%的pcp和18%的D/ e在识别CGM的益处方面表现出改进（P<）。pcp为01，P=NS D/Es)。34%的pcp和21%的D/ e对启动CGM的信心有可测量的改善（P<）。pcp为01，D/ e为P=NS)。持续的教育差距包括：61%的pcp和56%的D/ e需要接受关于选择使用CGM的患者的教育，50%的pcp和56%的D/ e需要接受关于克服CGM障碍的额外教育，35%的pcp需要接受关于CGM益处的额外教育。结论：本研究表明，通过一系列专家访谈，在线继续教育在提高与CGM使用相关的pcp和D/ e的临床知识、能力和信心方面取得了成功。在两组中都发现了显著的持续知识和能力差距，其中pcp的知识差距最大，D/ e的能力差距最大。A.拉金：没有。拉库尔特：没有。a：没有。雅培糖尿病护理的独立教育资助

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Diabetes 医学-内分泌学与代谢

CiteScore

12.50

自引率

2.60%

发文量

1968

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： Diabetes is a scientific journal that publishes original research exploring the physiological and pathophysiological aspects of diabetes mellitus. We encourage submissions of manuscripts pertaining to laboratory, animal, or human research, covering a wide range of topics. Our primary focus is on investigative reports investigating various aspects such as the development and progression of diabetes, along with its associated complications. We also welcome studies delving into normal and pathological pancreatic islet function and intermediary metabolism, as well as exploring the mechanisms of drug and hormone action from a pharmacological perspective. Additionally, we encourage submissions that delve into the biochemical and molecular aspects of both normal and abnormal biological processes. However, it is important to note that we do not publish studies relating to diabetes education or the application of accepted therapeutic and diagnostic approaches to patients with diabetes mellitus. Our aim is to provide a platform for research that contributes to advancing our understanding of the underlying mechanisms and processes of diabetes.