Impact

Along with this approach, another critical component to developing high-quality education is engaging stakeholders who can partner in full-cycle conceptualization, design and development of responsive education, considerate of nuanced learner audiences and their practice environments. This collaborative model is foundational to ensuring educational relevance and success.

ACHL strives to develop customized instructional designs responsive to the nuanced circumstances underlying identified educational needs, but it also works to create scalable solutions to accommodate different budgets and appeal to different learner types.

Like many CPD providers, ACHL follows Bloom's Taxonomy when considering the different learning domains and their relevance when establishing educational goals. The company leverages different adult learning principles to achieve these goals and engage learners. Often, its educational programs will span multiple domains, seeking to achieve higher cognitive learning as well as effective and behavioral learning outcomes.

“However, if there was one andragogical theory that underpins much of ACHL's educational philosophy and resonates for our vision of what CME/CPD can be, it's the constructivist theory," adds Lisa. "Much of our education is designed with the expectation that learning occurs through experience and reflection and we are here to facilitate an active, optimal process in the context of who they are, where they practice, and who they treat every single day."

Lisa explains further that this especially holds true when developing online education, which creates access to a heterogeneous mix of clinicians, varied by specialty, discipline, experience, practice setting and geography, as well as acumen levels. Despite this diversity, providers often look to measure educational effectiveness considerate of a "typical" learner within the primary target audience. Yet when clinicians outside of this narrow audience participate in an activity, the measures of success aren't optimally aligned to their role in the patient management experience and consequently, their educational results may not fully reflect the impact of the education.

"For these reasons, when we consider different learning domains in our instructional design, we think about these heterogeneous learners and the ways our education can serve them in delivering better healthcare across the compendium of care," she adds.

ACHL uses a variety of methods to measure educational impact through the lens of improved patient health. "And while there are some within the industry who continue to look at how many individuals show up versus whether we realized meaningful performance improvement through our education, there are many of our colleagues who have made tremendous efforts in innovating educational design and effectiveness measurements, and they inspire us every day,"says Lisa.

Admittedly, achieving patient-level outcomes can be challenging outside the clinical practice setting. "For ACHL's purpose, for those activities intended to improve health outcomes, we often ask learners to develop their own action plans where they self-assess conditions specific to their clinical practice, establish goals and identify changes they can implement to achieve those goals. These goals often range from process level changes such as adding an EMR flag as part of routine practice or hospital level goals such as lowering lengths of stay or reducing the number of readmissions," highlights Lisa.

"This approach is rooted in quality improvement practices, and while simple in design, it creates a path by which learners can reflect on what they learned and how they might apply it in the context of their individual practice setting."

In the last two years, ACHL has won two awards that best illustrate its market position. The first was the 2021 Alliance Industry Summit's (AIS) Best in Class Outcomes Award for a dermatology-focused program using ACHL's adaptive learning platform.

The second award was the 2022 ACEHP Innovative Format Award for ACHL's Pathfinder framework, a translational practice design that simultaneously addressed deficiencies in disease knowledge, suboptimal treatment selection, inconsistent guideline adherence and inadequate shared decision-making (performing precision medicine) in patients with ovarian cancer.