Come valutare le ricadute dell’ECM sul comportamento professionale degli operatori? Una scoping review

Background: CME is crucial to increase/update knowledge, skills, and competences of healthcare professionals; hence, evaluating its impact on professionals’ practice is fundamental. This research aims to investigate tools reported in the literature to evaluate the impact of CME, focusing on how to assess healthcare professionals’ changes in their practice (third level of Kirkpatrick's evaluation model). Materials and methods: A scoping review was conducted in PubMed and CINAHL, combining the following keywords: behavior change, effect, rebound, outcome, consequence, evaluation, assessment, continuing medical education, continuing professional development. Results: Nineteen single studies, one Systematic Review (SR) and one Position Paper resulted eligible. The evaluation instruments that emerged mostly consisted of self-assessment questionnaires created ad hoc, which generally were not validated. In a few studies, other stakeholders were involved in the evaluation, such as managers of participants involved in CME, or patients. In addition to questionnaires, some validated scales were used, as well as focus groups and/or interviews with participants or their managers. A few studies utilized objective instruments to assess CME outcomes, such as the pre-post analysis of medical records filled out by participants. The majority of the studies were not aligned with the recommendations of the SR and the Position Paper. Conclusion: The evaluation of CME effects on professionals’ behavior is mainly carried out through self-assessment questionnaires. Yet, more objective instruments should also be considered, including the analysis of official papers, as those included in audits. Furthermore, evaluations should also be conducted by other stakeholders (managers, colleagues, patients/clients).