Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
- Education
- genitourinary medicine
- Great Britain
- GUM services
- online
- postgraduate curriculum
- service development
- sexually transmitted diseases
The UK Department of Health have commissioned the Electronic Learning for Healthcare programme,1 from which the sexual health and HIV (eHIV–STI) project has been developed by the British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) and the Federation of Royal Colleges of Physicians. Professional bodies within the UK are increasingly looking to such packages for the delivery of training to healthcare professionals.2
eHIV–STI provides a web-based learning programme for both the sexually transmitted infections foundation course3 and will also, when completed, cover all the knowledge components of the genitourinary medicine (GUM) specialty curriculum.4 A survey of specialist/specialty registrars in GUM before eHIV–STI was available found that 70% believed web-based delivery of the knowledge component of their curriculum to be either a better approach or as effective.5
In order to develop a useful educational resource for registrars, early trial e-learning sessions (tutorials) were made available for evaluation. Comparisons were specifically sought with the existing lecture-based teaching course designed for GUM registrars, the BASHH sexually transmitted infection (STI)/HIV course. All current UK registrars were invited to register with a trial web-based learning management system. After the completion of at least one session trainees were asked to complete an online questionnaire.
Registered trainees were representative of the training stage and regions. The majority of respondents were satisfied with the overall session design, legibility and speed of access. Approximately a third of respondents had experienced technical problems in accessing the learning, mainly due to installing the correct supportive software and overcoming institutional security systems. The majority of respondents had previously attended the BASHH STI/HIV course. Likert scores (1–5) were good, with 20/28 respondents rating the sessions as ‘good/helpful’ (4) or ‘a great deal/extremely helpful’ (5) for improving understanding, and 20/29 rating similarly for perceived impact on clinical practice. These scores were significantly lower (p<0.001, Mann–Whitney U test) than similar scores for the lectures of the autumn 2009 BASHH STI/HIV course (n=2599 for understanding, n=2547 for clinical practice) (BASHH STI/HIV course secretariat, personal communication, 2009) suggesting lower satisfaction for online learning in direct comparison with the lecture course. However, it is intended that online learning will be blended with the course rather than used to replace it. Strong support was demonstrated for a number of possible alterations to the content and format of the course to be made once eHIV–STI is fully available (figure 1).
Maintaining motivation for online postgraduate education can be a challenge,6 and this may be one important benefit of continuing to run the lecture course. The challenge for course organisers will be to maintain those elements of face-to-face contact that trainees most value. Free text comments from respondents also expressed a hope that there should continue to be protected time and funding available for both electronic learning and course attendance.
The results of this evaluation were presented to the project executive to aid the final design pending full launch and feedback given to participating registrars. Funding for the Electronic Learning for Healthcare programme has been significantly reduced by the recent UK government spending review, but it does appear that this particular project will be completed.
An application has also been made to the Royal College of Physicians for eHIV–STI to attract continuing professional development points and therefore also be a useful resource for career-grade clinicians.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Abdul-Khaliq Nathekar from Electronic Learning for Healthcare and Ray Fewtrell of the Centre for Excellence in Developing Professionalism, School of Medical Education, University of Liverpool, for their assistance in collecting and analysing the results.
Footnotes
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.