Education for specialization in prosthodontics in Switzerland and the role of EPA.

Advertisement for any dental treatment was rare in Switzerland. Then the use of digital media became popular, particularly in the field of implant- and esthetic-dentistry. In parallel to the dental schools of public universities, private universities and companies built up centers for continuing education that issue specialists diplomas and M.Sc. degrees. Prosthodontics itself is characterized by many sub-disciplines that incorporated their own associations. These also offer graduate training curricula which diminish the significance of specialization in prosthodontics. Specialized prosthodontists do not have a financial benefit in Switzerland where dentistry is not supported by any insurance. In other European countries funding of prosthodontic treatment depends on their healthcare systems. There are four specialties in Dentistry recognized by the European Union (EU). Specialization in prosthodontics was introduced in Sweden already in 1982 and today it is declared in about 20 European countries, while for others no recognized program exists. Thus there are great variations with more recognized specialists in former east European countries. In Switzerland the prosthodontic specialization curriculum was developed and guided by the Swiss Society for Reconstructive Dentistry, and only in 2001 it became fully acknowledged by the Federal Department of Health. The four Swiss Universities offer the 3-year program under the supervision of the society, while the government remains the executive body. In 2003 EPA tried to set up guidelines and quality standards for an EPA recognized specialization. In spite of these attempts and the Bologna Reform in Europe, it appears that the quality standards and the level of education still may differ significantly among European countries.

Virtual Patients in continuing medical education and residency training: a pilot project for acceptance analysis in the framework of a residency revision course in pediatrics.

AIM Virtual patients (VPs) are a one-of-a-kind e-learning resource, fostering clinical reasoning skills through clinical case examples. The combination with face-to-face teaching is important for their successful integration, which is referred to as "blended learning". So far little is known about the use of VPs in the field of continuing medical education and residency training. The pilot study presented here inquired the application of VPs in the framework of a pediatric residency revision course. METHODS Around 200 participants of a pediatric nephology lecture ('nephrotic and nephritic syndrome in children') were offered two VPs as a wrap-up session at the revision course of the German Society for Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ) 2009 in Heidelberg, Germany. Using a web-based survey form, different aspects were evaluated concerning the learning experiences with VPs, the combination with the lecture, and the use of VPs for residency training in general. RESULTS N=40 evaluable survey forms were returned (approximately 21%). The return rate was impaired by a technical problem with the local Wi-Fi firewall. The participants perceived the work-up of the VPs as a worthwhile learning experience, with proper preparation for diagnosing and treating real patients with similar complaints. Case presentations, interactivity, and locally and timely independent repetitive practices were, in particular, pointed out. On being asked about the use of VPs in general for residency training, there was a distinct demand for more such offers. CONCLUSION VPs may reasonably complement existing learning activities in residency training.

Comparability of Outcome Frameworks in Medical Education: Implications for framework development

Background: The demand for international harmonization in medical education increases with the growing mobility of students and health professionals. Many medical societies and governmental offices have issued outcome frameworks (OF), which describe aims and contents of medical education based on competencies. These national standards affect the development of curricula as well as assessment and licensing procedures. Comparing OF and identifying factors that limit their comparability may thus foster international harmonization of medical education. Summary of Work: We conducted a systematic search for national OF in MedLine, EmBase and the internet. We included all OF in German or English that resulted from a national consensus process and were published or endorsed by a national society or governmental body. We extracted information in five predetermined categories: history of origin, audience, formal structure, medical schooling system and key terms. Summary of Results: Out of 1816 results, 13 OF were included into further analyses. OF reference each other, often without addressing existing differences (e.g. in target audiences). The two most cited OF are “CanMEDs” and “Scottish Doctor”. OF differ especially in their level of detail as well as in the underlying educational system. Discussion and Conclusions: Based on our results we propose a two-step blueprint for OF, that may help to establish comparability for internationally aligned key features – so-called “core competencies” – while at the same time allowing for necessary regional adaptations in terms of “secondary competencies”. Take-home messages: Considerable differences in at least five categories of OF currently hinder the comparability of outcome frameworks.