• A Steib, P Diemunsch, and J L Pourriat.
• Département d'anesthésiologie, hôpital Civil, HUS, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France. Annick.Steib@chru-strasbourg.fr
• Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2001 Apr 1; 20 (4): 342-6.

ObjectivesTo analyse the results of the immediate evaluation of an European teaching session using a questionnaire provided by the French College of anaesthesiologists.Study DesignOpen evaluation.MaterialQuestionnaires completed after each topic by 50 participants of an European course including 15 lectures were collected.MethodsThe types of professional exercise and the medical practise reliable to the different topics were pointed out. The evaluation included 4 items noted from 1 to 10: new information for medical practise, definition of pedagogic objectives, quality of means used for teaching, interest for the treated subject. The global mean score for each item and for each speaker was calculated. Results were compared according to the professional mode of exercise, the own medical practise and the project to modify it in the future.ResultsScores affected to items were significantly lower for participants exercising in PSPH compared to general and university hospitals and private clinics (p < 0.001). New information was better found in case of poor or absence of practise, but interest was improved when medical practise was frequent. 2/3 of the participants projected to modify their practise after the session.ConclusionThe analysis of medical evaluation should allow to determine an acceptable zone of quality which may be useful for accreditation. However, distorting results according to the professional mode of exercise and the own medical practise should encourage the development of adapted continuous medical education. Delayed evaluation may be necessary to objective the putative benefits of CME on medical practise.

6 keywords...

hide…