Changes in clinician ability to assess risk and help patients determine the need for hiv testing: a comparison of three teaching methods.

ABSTRACT

An estimated one of four people with HIV in the United States do not know they have the infection. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention encourages HIV testing in clinical settings, but there is evidence that this is not done on a regular basis. The purposes of this study were to (a) compare two less traditional teaching methods with a classroom method to determine whether the less traditional methods resulted in greater improvement of clinician knowledge, skill, and willingness to perform HIV risk assessment as the basis for recommending HIV testing; and (b) find out whether there were significant differences in convenience, cost, learner preference, or learner acceptance that would make one method more desirable than the others. Findings from participants in the standardized patient interaction with facilitator feedback (FB) and the case-based self-study module (SSM) were not different from those of participants in the interactive classroom education method (CL). Generally, there were positive changes in knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors over time. Participants preferred standardized patient interaction (FB) and interactive classes (CL) to self-study modules (SSM).