Implementing evidence-based practice in undergraduate teaching clinics: a systematic review and recommendations

Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, 124 Edward Street, Toronto M5G 1G6, Ontario, Canada.
Journal of dental education (Impact Factor: 0.97). 10/2004; 68(9):995-1003.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The objective of this project was to identify an effective methodology of approaching and implementing evidence-based principles in undergraduate teaching clinics to promote evidence-based dentistry in future clinical practice. A systematic review was undertaken to examine evidence-based clinical teaching and faculty continuing education. Research published from 1996 to 2002 was retrieved by searching several databases and the Internet, along with conducting hand searches and reviewing bibliographies maintained by faculty experts. Qualitative checklists for different types of studies were created to evaluate the literature. Relevant studies were selected if they met all four predetermined essential criteria and a minimum of two out of three desirable criteria. Systematic reviews were chosen if they met all five essential criteria. Data from selected articles were extracted, and study quality was assessed. We found that three systematic reviews and nine original research articles were deemed methodologically acceptable. Problem-based learning and evidence-based health care interventions increased student knowledge of medical topics and their ability to search, evaluate, and appraise medical literature. Dental students in a problem-based learning curriculum, emphasizing evidence-based practices, scored higher on the NDB I (National Dentistry Boards, Part I) than students in traditional curricula. While effective modules in implementing theoretical evidence-based principles exist, very few high-quality studies are available that examine these principles in dental undergraduate teaching clinics. No methodologically appropriate studies on the education of faculty in the implementation of evidence-based principles are available. Some studies promote promising theories and methodologies of teaching evidence-based care; based on these theories, a comprehensive model is proposed in this article. Considering the strength of evidence in the reviewed literature, we concluded that an evidence-based approach to clinical care is effective.

19 Reads
  • Source
    • "After the initial screening of titles and abstracts, we retrieved 23 full text articles for formal eligibility assessment. Of these, we excluded four articles that did not meet the eligibility criteria (three were not systematic reviews and one did not assess teaching of EBHC) [21]–[24] (Table 2) and included 16 completed (reported in 17 articles) systematic reviews. Figure 2 details the process of selecting systematic reviews for inclusion using the ‘preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses’ (PRISMA) flow diagram [25]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An evidence-based approach to health care is recognized internationally as a key competency for healthcare practitioners. This overview systematically evaluated and organized evidence from systematic reviews on teaching evidence-based health care (EBHC). We searched for systematic reviews evaluating interventions for teaching EBHC to health professionals compared to no intervention or different strategies. Outcomes covered EBHC knowledge, skills, attitudes, practices and health outcomes. Comprehensive searches were conducted in April 2013. Two reviewers independently selected eligible reviews, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. We included 16 systematic reviews, published between 1993 and 2013. There was considerable overlap across reviews. We found that 171 source studies included in the reviews related to 81 separate studies, of which 37 are in more than one review. Studies used various methodologies to evaluate educational interventions of varying content, format and duration in undergraduates, interns, residents and practicing health professionals. The evidence in the reviews showed that multifaceted, clinically integrated interventions, with assessment, led to improvements in knowledge, skills and attitudes. Interventions improved critical appraisal skills and integration of results into decisions, and improved knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviour amongst practicing health professionals. Considering single interventions, EBHC knowledge and attitude were similar for lecture-based versus online teaching. Journal clubs appeared to increase clinical epidemiology and biostatistics knowledge and reading behavior, but not appraisal skills. EBHC courses improved appraisal skills and knowledge. Amongst practicing health professionals, interactive online courses with guided critical appraisal showed significant increase in knowledge and appraisal skills. A short workshop using problem-based approaches, compared to no intervention, increased knowledge but not appraisal skills. EBHC teaching and learning strategies should focus on implementing multifaceted, clinically integrated approaches with assessment. Future rigorous research should evaluate minimum components for multifaceted interventions, assessment of medium to long-term outcomes, and implementation of these interventions.
    PLoS ONE 01/2014; 9(1):e86706. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0086706 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "For beginning medical learners, the large body of knowledge necessary to be learned in combination with rapid advances in clinical management suggest the utility of incorporating assessments that present ambiguity and change with respect to real-life clinical problems (Maudsley & Strivens 2000). Problem-solving skill is an organized activity that can become routine when shaped by adequate feedback (Werb & Matear 2004). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Script Concordance test (SCT) measures clinical reasoning in the context of uncertainty by comparing the responses of examinees and expert clinicians. It uses the level of agreement with a panel of experts to assign credit for the examinee's answers. This study describes the development and validation of a SCT for pre-clinical medical students. Faculty from two US medical schools developed SCT items in the domains of anatomy, biochemistry, physiology, and histology. Scoring procedures utilized data from a panel of 30 expert physicians. Validation focused on internal reliability and the ability of the SCT to distinguish between different cohorts. The SCT was administered to an aggregate of 411 second-year and 70 fourth-year students from both schools. Internal consistency for the 75 test items was satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha = 0.73). The SCT successfully differentiated second- from fourth-year students and both student groups from the expert panel in a one-way analysis of variance (F(2,508) = 120.4; p < 0.0001). Mean scores for students from the two schools were not significantly different (p = 0.20). This SCT successfully differentiated pre-clinical medical students from fourth-year medical students and both cohorts of medical students from expert clinicians across different institutions and geographic areas. The SCT shows promise as an easy-to-administer measure of "problem-solving" performance in competency evaluation even in the beginning years of medical education.
    Medical Teacher 06/2011; 33(6):472-7. DOI:10.3109/0142159X.2010.531157 · 1.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
Show more


19 Reads
Available from