Can a specialty society educate its members to think differently about clinical decisions? Results of a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: Measure the effect of specialty society-developed continuing medical education (CME) on clinical decision making. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: National sample of neurologists. PARTICIPANTS: Of 492 neurologists randomly selected from an ongoing American Academy of Neurology CME program, 248 were randomized to receive a mailed CME course, and 244 did not receive it. INTERVENTION: A mailed educational course on movement disorders, developed by the specialty society, containing information on diseases and practice recommendations with illustrative case presentations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We assessed adherence to 16 practice recommendations on disease detection, diagnostic test use, and treatments by mailed survey sent to all subjects 4.5 months after the intervention group received the course (73% response rate). The survey contained detailed clinical scenarios to measure self-reported clinical decision making and short open-ended questions to measure factual knowledge. More intervention participants (up to 2.6 times more) than control subjects reported clinical decision making adherent to 9 of the 16 recommendations (p < .05), For 4 of the other 7 recommendations, adherence exceeded 85% in both groups. Within the intervention group, neurologists who read the educational course were 2 to 6 times more likely to be adherent than neurologists who did not. The intervention group had better factual knowledge than control subjects in six of seven areas (p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: This educational course improved neurologists' reported decision making. Specialty society-developed CME that utilizes a similar format may enhance the effectiveness of mailed CME information to improve physicians' approach to clinical decisions.