Objective To develop an online, interactive educational tool to deliver an evidence-based clinical practice guideline to faculty members at a Canadian chiropractic college. Second, to evaluate the learning, design, and engagement constructs of the tool in a sample of chiropractic faculty members. Methods Using an integrated knowledge translation methodology and the Knowledge to Action Framework, we developed an evidence-based online learning tool. The context of the tool focused on a clinical practice guideline on the management of neck pain. We evaluated the learning, design, and engagement constructs in a sample of faculty members and residents using the Learning Object Evaluation Scale for Students. Participants were also asked to provide suggestions for improvement of the tool. Results Sixteen participants completed the evaluation. Most (68.8%) participants were chiropractors, 75% were male and 56% were between the ages of 25 and 44 years. At least 75% of participants agreed that the learning, design, and engagement constructs of the learning tool were adequate. The open-ended suggestions unveiled 3 pedagogical themes, relating to multimedia, thinking skills, and learner control, within the tool that could benefit from further development. These themes informed recommendations to improve the tool. Conclusion Our online, interactive, module-based learning tool has sound pedagogical properties. Further research is needed to determine if its use is associated with a change in knowledge.

Objective To describe the best evidence on the effectiveness of technology-based learning tools designed to improve knowledge of health care providers about clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Methods We conducted a systematic review, searching MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from inception to July 2018. Included studies investigated the effectiveness of any technology-based learning tools developed to improve knowledge of health care providers about CPGs. We used a 2-phase screening process to determine eligibility. Pairs of reviewers critically appraised relevant studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklist for randomized controlled trials or the National Institutes of Health checklist for pre- and postintervention trials. Evidence from internally valid studies was described using a best-evidence summary. We conducted a sensitivity analysis to determine whether results varied according to methodological quality. Results Twenty-five of 8321 articles met our selection criteria. Six studies had a low risk of bias and were included in this review. Spaced education was associated with improvement in knowledge; however, its effectiveness relative to other interventions is unknown. Module-based online educational interventions were associated with improvement in knowledge of CPGs; however, they may not be more effective than paper-based self-learning or in-person workshops. The sensitivity analysis determined that the evidence was similar between the high and low risk of bias studies. Conclusion Module-based- and spaced-education interventions may be beneficial for improving health care providers' knowledge of CPGs; however, much of the evidence toward their use is preliminary.

Purpose: We compare patient populations attending chiropractors in the field to those in teaching clinics to allow educational institutions to determine if students are exposed to a similar case mix. The purpose of our study was to describe and compare descriptively the clinical case mix of a recently opened community-based teaching clinic to previously published practice data. Methods: A retrospective descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using new patient records completed at a clinic. Data were extracted using a specifically designed abstraction form. Results: We manually abstracted 649 files. A total of 580 new patient files was included in the analysis, among which 57.7% included female patients with a mean age of 43 years (SD 18), and 42.1% presented with a chief complaint of more than one year in duration. The vast majority of patients complained of spinal pain (81.4%), most commonly low back pain. Almost 92% of the diagnoses were classified as simple (sprain/strain). The average number of visits per patient was 7.4 (SD 11.3); 54.7% received spinal manipulation on their first visit. The majority of patients were referred by the treating intern (64.8%) and about 24% of patients were local residents. Conclusions: Our study contributed to the few studies detailing patients attending chiropractic academic teaching clinics. It provided benchmark demographic and clinical data that may be used for operational planning. Our study suggested that the case mix of this teaching clinic provides interns with appropriate learning opportunities to achieve entry to practice competencies.