Assessing and enhancing quality through outcomes‐based continuing professional development (CPD): a review of current practice

Abstract

Numerous professional bodies have questioned whether traditional input-based continuing professional development (CPD) schemes are effective at measuring genuine learning and improving practice performance and patient health. The most commonly used type of long-established CPD activities, such as conferences, lectures and symposia, have been found to have a limited effect on improving practitioner competence and performance, and no significant effect on patient health outcomes. Additionally, it is thought that the impact of many CPD activities is reduced when they are undertaken in isolation outside of a defined structure of directed learning. In contrast, CPD activities which are interactive, encourage reflection on practice, provide opportunities to practice skills, involve multiple exposures, help practitioners to identify between current performance and a standard to be achieved, and are focused on outcomes, are the most effective at improving practice and patient health outcomes.

South African health practitioners’ patterns of CPD practices – implications for maintenance of licensure

“…[16] The impact of CPD activities is limited when undertaken in an ad hoc manner outside of a defined structure of directed learning and contributes little to improving practitioners' performance or patient/client health outcomes. [17] Guidelines on how to develop learning plans that address gaps in knowledge and skills could be beneficial to practitioners in the context of MoL. The most frequently chosen learning activities were input-based approaches (i.e.…”

“…lectures, conferences and workshops), which are regarded as simple and cost effective and provide an easily quantifiable method of measuring individual CPD activity. [17] Systematic reviews suggest that these common, primarily didactic learning activities have a limited effect on improving practitioner competence and performance, and no significant effect on patient and health systems outcomes. [17,18] CPD activities, which are interactive, provide opportunities to acquire and practice skills, [19] involve multiple exposures, encourage reflection on practice, and are focused on outcomes, are reported as effective in improving practice and patient health outcomes.…”

“…[17,18] CPD activities, which are interactive, provide opportunities to acquire and practice skills, [19] involve multiple exposures, encourage reflection on practice, and are focused on outcomes, are reported as effective in improving practice and patient health outcomes. [17] Respondents generally supported the expected level of engagement with CPD, i.e. the number of CEUs expected annually.…”

“…[15] Assisting practitioners to develop individualised CPD programmes that are linked explicitly to improving their professional performance and patient/client health, could result in greater ownership of professional development. [17] Cost is a frequently reported barrier to CPD. [20][21][22][23] Female and rural practitioners experienced cost as a greater challenge.…”

“…It is in the interest of employers and patients/clients that practitioners are up to date regarding professional knowledge and skills. [16,17] Employers should be encouraged to support their practitioners' engagement with CPD.…”