scholarly journals Virtual Patient Simulation in HIV: An Online Educational Tool to Improve Evidence-Based Clinical Decision-Making

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S445-S445
Author(s):  
Simi Hurst ◽  
Douglas Blevins
CNS Spectrums ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-190
Author(s):  
Jovana Lubarda ◽  
Martin Warters ◽  
Piyali Chatterjee ◽  
Marlene P. Freeman ◽  
Roger S. McIntyre

AbstractObjectivesThe goal of this study was to determine physician performance in diagnosis and management of postpartum depression (PPD) and to provide needed education in the consequence free environment of a virtual patient simulation (VPS).Methods∙ A continuing medical education activity was delivered via an online VPS learning platform that offers a lifelike clinical care experience with complete freedom of choice in clinical decision-making and expert personalized feedback to address learner’s practice gaps∙ Physicians including psychiatrists, primary care physicians (PCPs), and obstetricians/gynecologists (ob/gyns) were presented with two cases of PPD designed to model the experience of actual practice by including use of electronic health records∙ Following virtual interactions with patients, physicians were asked to make decisions regarding assessments, diagnoses, and pharmacologic therapies. The clinical decisions were analyzed using a sophisticated decision engine, and clinical guidance (CG) based on current evidence-based recommendations was provided in response to learners’ clinical decisions∙ Impact of the education was measured by comparing participant decisions pre- and post-CG using a 2-tailed, paired t-test; P <.05 was considered statistically significant∙ The activity launched on Medscape Education on April 26, 2018, and data were collected through to June 17,2018.Results∙ From pre- to post-CG in the simulation, physicians were more likely to make evidence-based clinical decisions related to:∙ Ordering appropriate baseline tests including tools/scales to screen for PPD: in case 1, psychiatrists (n=624) improved from 34% to 42% on average (P<.05); PCPs (n=197) improved from 38% to 48% on average (P<.05); and, ob/gyns (n=216) improved from 30% to 38% on average (P<.05)∙ Diagnosing moderate-to-severe PPD: in case 2, psychiatrists (n=531) improved from 46% to 62% (P<.05); PCPs (n=154) improved from 43% to 55% (P<.05); and, ob/gyns (n=137) improved from 55% to 73% (P<.05)∙ Ordering appropriate treatments for moderate-to-severe PPD such as selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors: in case 2, psychiatrists (n=531) improved from 47% CG to 75% (P<.05); PCPs (n=154) improved from 55% to 74% (P<.05); and, ob/gyns (n=137) improved from 51% to 78% (P<.05)∙ Interestingly, a small percentage of physicians (average of 5%) chose investigational agents for PPD which were in clinical trials pre-CG, and this increased to an average of 9% post-CGConclusionsPhysicians who participated in VPS-based education significantly improved their clinical decision-making in PPD, particularly in selection of validated screening tools/scales, diagnosis, and pharmacologic treatments based on severity. Given that VPS immerses physicians in an authentic, practical learning experience matching the scope of clinical practice, this type of intervention can be used to determine clinical practice gaps and translate knowledge into practice.Funding Acknowledgements: The educational activity and outcomes measurement were funded through an independent educational grant from Sage Therapeutics, Inc.


2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.


1999 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 585-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia Granados

This paper examines the rationality of the concepts underlying evidence—based medicineand health technology assessment (HTA), which are part of a new current aimed at promoting the use of the results of scientific studies for decision making in health care. It describes the different approaches and purposes of this worldwide movement, in relation to clinical decision making, through a summarized set of specific HTA case studies from Catalonia, Spain. The examples illustrate how the systematic process of HTA can help in several types of uncertainties related to clinical decision making.


2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 508-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Mamédio da Costa Santos ◽  
Cibele Andrucioli de Mattos Pimenta ◽  
Moacyr Roberto Cuce Nobre

Evidence based practice is the use of the best scientific evidence to support the clinical decision making. The identification of the best evidence requires the construction of an appropriate research question and review of the literature. This article describes the use of the PICO strategy for the construction of the research question and bibliographical search.


2016 ◽  
Vol 179 (7) ◽  
pp. 175-176
Author(s):  
Natalie Robinson ◽  
Marnie Brennan

BestBETs for Vets are generated by the Centre for Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine at the University of Nottingham to help answer specific questions and assist in clinical decision making. Although evidence is often limited, they aim to find, present and draw conclusions from the best available evidence, using a standardised framework. A more detailed description of how BestBETs for Vets are produced was published in VR, April 4, 2015, vol 176, pp 354-356.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document