Implementing clinical guidelines – equally effective results with remote and in-person training

Background  Clinical guidelines aim to steer healthcare towards evidence-based and consistent practices in significant disease groups. Implementing these guidelines into practice requires staff training. There is limited information on the benefits of remote and in-person training in professional continuing education, but in degree programs, they appear equally effective.

Methods  In a comparative design, identical remote and in-person training sessions were conducted for physiotherapists and physicians, based on the "Hand and Forearm Strain Disorders" guideline. The study's 65 participants were randomized into remote and in-person training groups. They completed questionnaires measuring knowledge and attitudes before and after the training.

Results  Knowledge increased equally in both the remote and in-person groups following the training. The mean difference in correct answers before and after the training was 1.5 points (95% CI: 1.1 - 1.9, p<0.001), with no differences observed between professional groups in the outcomes of remote and in-person training. Differences in attitudes between remote and in-person groups were minor.

Conclusions  Remote training can be an effective way to implement clinical guidelines into practice and does not appear to differ significantly from in-person training in terms of learning outcomes.