Programme no. 424-OP
Professional Development
Reforming continuous professional development for GPs
Niels Kristian Kjaer*1
1Research Unit of General Practice, Institute of Public Health,University of Southern Denmark ,Sonderborg,Denmark
* = Presenting author
Objectives:

To design an effective and feasible CPD programme for GPs

Background:

Denmark has a voluntary individually planned CPD programme bases on approved and funded CPD activities and Danish GPs are participating in broad range of CPD activities. An international discussion of the feasibility and effectiveness of CPD has reached Denmark, and the GPs and the Public Health Contractors have agreed to reform the CDP programme. The voluntary and individual planned CPD is to be supplemented with a systematic centrally planned programme. In this process we explored the GPs’ preferences for future CPD followed by a multidimensional learning need analysis. This abstract will present the GPs’ preferences and initial data from the learning need analysis.

Results:

Questionnaire response rate was 686/1,079 (63%). GPs had following preferences for a future CPD programme: Option to exchange experience with colleagues. Focus on implementation of new knowledge into practice. Ensure 10 days of CPD activities per year. CPD programmes where 50% are planned by a central organisation and 50% are planned by the individual GP. Teachers with a profound insight and knowledge about general practice. There was neither an overall request for appraisal, nor for more CPD activities based on interactive learning strategies. There was however variability in GPs’ preferences.

The data analyse of the learning needs are still in progress, the initial result will be presented at the presentation.

Material/Methods:

A questionnaire enrolling 1/3 of all Danish GP were performed. The questionnaire included a discrete choice experiment.

A multidimensional learning need analyse was performed. 15 practice-based small learning groups and a group appointed by the Public Health Care Contractors were asked to identify learning needs. Followed by a validation process to be performed by GP researchers and a special appointed GP group, which will focus on narrative person centred medicine. The Danish family medicine curriculum are used as reference in all the analysis.

Conclusion:

Danish GPs are open towards combing individual planned voluntary CPD activities with a central planed programme based on a multidimensional mutual learning need analysis. But it has to focus on how to implement knowledge in practice, allow exchange of experience and be based on the profound understanding of the context of general practice.

Points for discussion:

Do a multidimensional need analysis approach make sense for trained GPs?

How can we maintain and stimulate professional commitment/working joy if we have make part of the CPD programme mandatory?

How can we ensure CPD activities will have an impact on the following clinical performance?