How can we teach EBM in clinical practice? : an analysis of barriers to implementation of on-the-job EBM teaching and learning.

Introduction: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) improves the quality of health care. Courses on how to teach EBM in practice are available, but knowledge does not automatically imply its application in teaching. We aimed to identify and compare barriers and facilitators for teaching EBM in clinical practice in various European countries. Methods: A questionnaire was constructed listing potential barriers and facilitators for EBM teaching in clinical practice. Answers were reported on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from not at all being a barrier to being an insurmountable barrier. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 120 clinical EBM teachers from 11 countries. Lack of time was the strongest barrier for teaching EBM in practice (median 5). Moderate barriers were the lack of requirements for EBM skills and a pyramid hierarchy in health care management structure (median 4). In Germany, Hungary and Poland, reading and understanding articles in English was a higher barrier than in the other countries. Conclusion: Incorporation of teaching EBM in practice faces several barriers to implementation. Teaching EBM in clinical settings is most successful where EBM principles are culturally embedded and form part and parcel of everyday clinical decisions and medical practice.

Evaluation of an online, case-based interactive approach to teaching pathophysiology

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate a new pedagogical approach in teaching fluid, electrolyte and acid-base pathophysiology in undergraduate students. METHODS: This approach comprises traditional lectures, the study of clinical cases on the web and a final interactive discussion of these cases in the classroom. When on the web, the students are asked to select laboratory tests that seem most appropriate to understand the pathophysiological condition underlying the clinical case. The percentage of students having chosen a given test is made available to the teacher who uses it in an interactive session to stimulate discussion with the whole class of students. The same teacher used the same case studies during 2 consecutive years during the third year of the curriculum. RESULTS: The majority of students answered the questions on the web as requested and evaluated positively their experience with this form of teaching and learning. CONCLUSIONS: Complementing traditional lectures with online case-based studies and interactive group discussions represents, therefore, a simple means to promote the learning and the understanding of complex pathophysiological mechanisms. This simple problem-based approach to teaching and learning may be implemented to cover all fields of medicine.

Immunological mechanism of action and clinical profile of disease-modifying treatments in multiple sclerosis.

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a life-long, potentially debilitating disease of the central nervous system (CNS). MS is considered to be an immune-mediated disease, and the presence of autoreactive peripheral lymphocytes in CNS compartments is believed to be critical in the process of demyelination and tissue damage in MS. Although MS is not currently a curable disease, several disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are now available, or are in development. These DMTs are all thought to primarily suppress autoimmune activity within the CNS. Each therapy has its own mechanism of action (MoA) and, as a consequence, each has a different efficacy and safety profile. Neurologists can now select therapies on a more individual, patient-tailored basis, with the aim of maximizing potential for long-term efficacy without interruptions in treatment. The MoA and clinical profile of MS therapies are important considerations when making that choice or when switching therapies due to suboptimal disease response. This article therefore reviews the known and putative immunological MoAs alongside a summary of the clinical profile of therapies approved for relapsing forms of MS, and those in late-stage development, based on published data from pivotal randomized, controlled trials.