• Nancy L Davis, Steven L Lawrence, Jeffrey A Morzinski, and Mary Ellen Radjenovich.
• National Institute for Quality Improvement and Education, Homestead, PA 15120, USA. ndavis@niqie.org
• Fam Med. 2009 Nov 1;41(10):735-40.

Background And ObjectivesThe American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) designates enhanced continuing Medical education (CME) credit (evidence based [EB] CME) to activities that meet specific criteria incorporating EB medicine principles. However, little is known about the effect of this innovation on EB-CME faculty or their learners.MethodsSubjects were faculty presenters and participants at the 2006 AAFP Annual Scientific Assembly. We compared presenters and participants of sessions with EB-CME approval to those without, assessing faculty preparation and participants' perceptions of CME quality and value.ResultsEB-CME faculty preparation was more likely to use evidence-based medicine (EBM) resources and less likely to rely upon books, journals, or personal experiences. There were statistically significant differences in session participants' perceptions with regard to scientific evidence presented, perception of commercial bias, and application of information to practice, with EB CME sessions more favorable in all dimensions. Main faculty barriers to EB- CME application were time constraints and limited understanding of the application and approval process.ConclusionsThe AAFP's EB-CME designation is associated with greater faculty use of EBM sources, while EB-CME participants perceive EB-CME as higher in quality and value.

12 keywords...

hide…