medigraphic.com
Órgano de Difusión de la Asociación Académica Panamericana de Medicina Familiar A.C.

2010, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Arch Med Fam 2010; 12 (3)

Evaluation of Training in Family Medicine: Differences Between Postgraduate and Continuing Education

Saura LJ, Leal HM, Rubio GE, Monzó NE, Martínez PA, Gómez PJ

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 93-102
PDF size: 206.19 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To verify whether there are differences in the evaluation of the training courses received by Primary Care Residents and Physicians. Material and Methods: Observational and retrospective study. Primary Care Educational Unit in Murcia, Spain. Participants: Primary Care Physicians and Primary Care Residents. The evaluation model employed in the courses is the same in both cases, with a five-item Likert scale-type questionnaire (1, worst evaluation, and 5, best evaluation) on seven quality criteria related with the course taken: 1) quality of the content; 2) teaching methodology utilized; 3) level of acquired knowledge; 4) whether these are stimulating for their professional practice. 5) relationship with the professors; 6) teaching ability of the professors, and 7) general course evaluation. All evaluation questionnaires were analyzed separately of courses imparted to Primary Care Residents and Physicians administered during the years 2008 and 2009. Results: Globally, the Primary Care Residents gave a worse evaluation to all of the criteria than the Primary Care Physicians (p ‹0.001 in all of the items). In the comparison between courses for Residents of the years 2008 and 2009, the score reveal that the 2009 Residents gave a better course evaluation than those of 2008, with statistical significance achieved in three of seven articles analyzed (methodology, acquired knowledge, and being stimulating for professional practice). Conclusions: Primary Care Residents assess the courses given to them as less satisfactory with respect to Primary Care Physicians who have completed their postgraduate training.


REFERENCES

  1. Van der Vleuten C. Validity of final examination in undergraduate medical training. BMJ 2000;321:1217-9.

  2. Cantillon P, Jones R. Does continuing medical education in general practice make a difference? BMJ 1999;318:1276-9.

  3. Harden RM. Multi professional education: part 1-effective multi professional education. Medical Teacher 1998;20:402-8.

  4. Gayoso Diz P, Viana Zulaica C, García González J, Tojal del Casero F. Los tutores de medicina de familia: actitudes y actividades de tutorización. Aten Primaria 1995; 15:481-6.

  5. Martín A. La figura del médico de familia. Med Clin (Barc) 1993; 100 Supl 1:12-13.

  6. Martín A. Formación en Atención Primaria de Salud. Rev Clin Esp 1992; 191:325-332.

  7. Challis M. Portfolios and assessment: meeting the challenge. Med Teach 2001;23:437-40.

  8. Martín Zurro A. Diversificación metodológica de la evaluación de la competencia del médico de familia. Jano 2002;42:1350-1.

  9. Sánchez FJ, Molina Durán F, Martínez Ros MT, Sánchez Sánchez F, Cifuentes Verdú MA, Martínez Hernández MA. Programa MIR de medicina familiar: Una interacción transprofesional en una realidad compleja. Aten Primaria. 2004;33:312-9.

  10. Pales J, Gual A. Recursos educativos en Ciencias de la Salud. Educ Med 2004;7:4-9.

  11. Programa de la Especialidad de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo y Ministerio de Educación y Cultura; 2002.

  12. Gayoso Diz P, Viana Zulaica C, García González J, Tojal del Casero F. Los tutores de medicina de familia: actitudes y actividades de tutela. Aten Primaria 1995;15:481-6.

  13. Labay Matías M, Buñuel Álvarez JC, Rubio Montañés ML, Martín Calama Valero J, Guerrero Omeñaca ML, Olmedillas Álvaro MJ. Estado de opinión de los médicos residentes de medicina familiar y comunitaria en hospitales españoles. Aten Primaria1992;10:880-2.

  14. Santos Guerra MA, Prados Torres JD, Fernández Sierra J, Martín Ruiz MV, Angulo Rasco F. Evaluación externa de la formación de médicos residentes: el arte de mejorar a través del conocimiento. Barcelona: semFYC, 1996.

  15. Saura Llamas J. Cómo organizar la consulta docente para formar residentes. Algunos principios básicos. Aten Primaria 2005; 35(6):318-24.

  16. Saura Llamas J, Sesma R, Fernández J, Borchert C, Sáez A. Docencia postgrado en medicina de familia: ¿qué sabemos de los residentes? Aten Primaria 2001; 28(6):405-414.

  17. Pujol Farriols R. Médicos residentes (MIR) insatisfechos. Med Clin (Barc) 1997; 109: 623-624.

  18. Sellarés J, Galán M, Cunillera R, Benavent J, Lobet P, Parellada N. Los centros de salud docentes de Barcelona. Opiniones de los residentes. Aten Primaria 1993; 11:357-9.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com