Curricula for teaching clinical practice guidelines in US psychiatry residency and child and adolescent fellowship programs: A survey study

Objective: To determine the characteristics of curricula for teaching the content of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in psychiatric residency and child and adolescent fellowship programs as well as to determine if and how the learning of CPG content is applied in clinical care settings. Methods: We conducted a national online survey of directors of general psychiatry residency and child and adolescent fellowship programs in the USA. The survey questionnaire included 13 brief questions about the characteristics used to teach CPGs in the programs, as well as two demographic questions about each program and director. Descriptive statistics were reported for each questionnaire item by program classification (i.e., child and adolescent vs. general psychiatry). Results: The survey response rate was 49.8 % (146 out of 293). Just 23 % of programs reported having written goals and objectives related to teaching CPGs. The most frequently taught aspect of CPGs was their content (72 % of programs). Didactic sessions were the most frequently employed teaching strategy (79 % of programs). Regarding the application of CPG learning in treatment care settings, just 16 % of programs applied algorithms in care settings, and 15 % performed evaluations to determine consistency between CPG recommendations and care delivery. Only 8 % of programs utilized audit and feedback to residents about their adherence to CPGs. Faculty time constraints and insufficient interest were the leading barriers (39 % and 33 % of programs, respectively) to CPG teaching, although 38 % reported no barriers. However, child and adolescent programs less commonly identified insufficient interest among faculty as a barrier to teaching CPGs compared to general programs (20 % vs. 43 %). Moreover, compared to general programs, child and adolescent fellowship programs taught more aspects of CPGs, used more educational activities to teach the content of specific CPGs, and used more methods to evaluate the teaching of CPGs. Conclusions: Although the majority of programs provided some teaching of CPGs, the rigorousness of the teaching approaches was limited, especially attempts to evaluate the extent and effectiveness of their use in clinical care. Child and adolescent fellowship programs provided more extensive teaching and evaluation related to CPGs.