Seventh Annual Asthma and Allergy Conference
September 2012
After Action Report
CME Evaluation Summary: Physicians and Physician Assistants
Asthma and Allergy Conference 2012
September 7 & 8, 2011
Hosted by the Asthma & Allergy Foundation of America, Alaska Chapter
Based on the evaluation forms completed for this course offered on September 7 and 8, 2012 by physicians and physician assistants, the overall response was extremely positive.
Providers accepting CME credit were asked to complete a multi page evaluation form to evaluate the speakers and quality of each presentation, as well as the conference organization and overall content. .
Friday Day Program, CME Evaluation
September 7, 2012
The evaluation tool showed an overall rating of excellent for the combined faculty members with a group score average of 4.75out of a possible total score of 5. The overall score for the effectiveness of the various teaching methods was scored at a 4.87 out of a possible 5. Suggestions for next year include: additional use of case studies.There were also several suggestions about moving to a full day Friday format.
The physical environment received a total score of 4.70. Overall, the participants had positive comments to say about the venue and food provided. Several comments complemented the food and meeting.
The seminars will now be broken down by presenter. Each presenter will be evaluated based on the learner’s achievement of the learning objective and the expertise of each faculty member.
Anaphylaxis was presented by Dennis Ledford, MD and received anexcellent rating with a combined score of 4.85 for expertise of the presenter. The average combined score evaluating the objective achievements for this topic was 4.88 out of a possible 5.
What’s Bugging You: An Update in Hymenoptera Allergy was presented by Jeffrey Demain, MD. Dr Demainreceived an excellent rating with a combined score of 4.79 out of a possible 5; The individual objectives were rated separately and then as a group with an average total score of 4.75 out of a possible score of 5.
Mastocytosis was presented by Eric Meier, MD and he received a good score with a combined score of 4.5 out of a possible 5. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was good at 4.4
Allergic to Life’s Pleasures was presented by Luz Fonacier, MD. The excellent score for expertise of this presenter was excellent at 4.81. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for a total score of 4.57.
Eczema- What Evil Lurks in the Skin was presented by Adrian Letz, MD, andhe had an excellentrating of 4.74 for his expertise. The individual objectives were rated separately and then as a group with an average total score of 4.75 out of a possible 5.
Evidence Based Medicine and Life in the Fast Lane: waspresented by David Lang, MD and he had an excellent rating of 4.79 for his expertise. The individual objectives were rated separately and then as a group with an average total score of 4.65 out of a possible 5,
Overall, the opening day of the Asthma and Allergy Conference was well received. The participants were able to clearly meet their objectives and personal needs. The presenters were all rated in the excellent to good range throughout the day. The course content was rated very highly with many comments from participants supporting their ability to apply what they had learned to their clinical practice and everyday life. Please see the attached comments about what providers plan to bring back to their practice.
Evening Program, CME Evaluation
September 7, 2012
Based on the evaluation forms completed for the course offered the evening of September 7, 2012, the overall response was very positive. The scale used to evaluate the event is based on a 5 point scale with 5 being Excellent, 4 being Good, 3 being Average, 2 being Fair, and 1 point equaling a Poor rating.
The physical environment received a total score of 4.85. The participants offered positive comments on the venue and dinner provided.
Written comments indicated that this was an interesting talk for many providers. Several mentioned their intent to research the subject further. The participants offered positive comments on the venue and dinner provided.
Medical Misadventureswas presented by Paul Stockler,JD, The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was 4.74 out of a possible 5.0. The Faculty had a combined rating of excellent with a score of 4.71for his expertise. Teaching methods for this program scored a 4.69.
Asthma and Allergy Conference 2012, CME Evaluation
September 8, 2012
Based on the evaluation forms completed for this course offered on Sept 8, 2012, the overall response was very positive. The scale used to evaluate the event is based on a 5 point scale with 5 being Excellent, 4 being Good, 3 being Average, 2 being Fair, and 1 point equaling a Poor rating.
.
Written comments indicated that the knowledge obtained at the session would be used in a variety of healthcare settings. Please see attached listing of clinical uses.
The evaluation tool showed an overall rating of excellent for the combined faculty members with a group score average of 4.80 out of a possible total score of 5. The overall score for the effectiveness of the various teaching methods was scored at a 4.80 out of a possible 5. Many attendees added written comments indicating there were a good variety of topics and speakers were well selected. Suggestions were made to include more panel discussion and case studies. Many comments indicated that the conference was the best they had attended and that this conference was a great professional development opportunity.
The physical environment received a total score of 4.76. Overall, the participants had positive comments to say about the venue and food provided. Several comments complemented the food, service and preferred the Girdwood location. The temperature control and microphones may need tweaking next year to meet everyone’s needs.There were a few technical issues caused by generator issues.
The seminars will now be broken down by presenter. Each presenter will be evaluated based on the learner’s achievement of the learning objective and the expertise of each faculty member.
Challenges to Asthma Management waspresented by David Lang, MD. An excellent rating with a score of 4.71 for expertise of the presenter was achieved. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was 4.52 out of a possible 5.
Pediatric Asthma Hospital Admission: Reasons for failure of outpatient management was presented byThad Woodard, MDand he received an excellent score of 4.58 out of a possible 5 for expertise. The individual objectives were rated with a good total score of 4.35.
Get the Picturewas presented by Harold Cable, MD. An excellent rating with a score of 4.79 for expertise of the presenter was achieved. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was 4.73.
Corticosteroids: A Two Edged Swordwas presented by James Tracy, DO. The average score for expertise of this presenter was excellent at 4.76. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an average total score of 4.76.
Allergic Rhinitis and Conjunctivitiswas presented by Adrian Letz, MD. Dr. Letzreceived a rating of 4.86 for his expertise. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an average total score of 4.78
Clinical Cases in Hereditary Angioedema was presented by Allen Kaplan, MD. The average score for expertise of the presenter was excellent at 4.86. The subject matter was covered well with a combined average score for objectives achieved at 4.91 out of a possible 5.
Do it Yourself (DIY) Immune Deficiency was presented by Troy Torgerson, MD and he received a score of 4.94 for his expertise. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an good total score of 4.89
Recurrent Fever: Looking for Zebras was presented by Jeffrey Demain, MD. The excellent score for expertise of the presenter was 4.89. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an average total score of 4.82indicating that the subject matter was communicated well.
SCID: Just the Tip of the Iceberg was presented by Fatima Khan, MD. The average score for expertise of the presenters was excellent at 4.77. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was also excellent with a score of 4.74 out of 5.0.
Food Allergy: The new Guidelines presented by Melinda Rathkopf, MD. The average score for expertise of the presenter was excellent at 4.84. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was also excellent with a score of 4.71out of 5.0.
Spectrum of Food Allergywas presented by Melinda Rathkopf, MD. The average score for expertise of the presenter was excellent at 4.86. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was also excellent with a score of 4.75out of 5.0.
Separating the Wheat from the Chaff was presented by Teresa Neeno, MD. The average score for expertise of the presenter was excellent at4.8.The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was also excellent with a score of 4.65 out of 5.
General comments: Physicians had very positive evaluations of the overall conference such as: “best conference ever attended”, “Keep up the good work”, “Great content without major redundancy” G.ood show”, “Very well done”, “Overall outstanding program.
Overall, AAFA Alaska’s 2012 Asthma & Allergy Conference was well received by physicians and physician assistantsand rated as an excellent opportunity for asthma and allergy continuing medical education in the state of Alaska. Evaluations from this year will aide the conference planning committee as they embark on their plans for the 2013 Asthma & Allergy Conference.
CEU EVALUATION SUMMARY ANALYSIS
ANP’s, CNM’s & RN’s
Asthma and Allergy Conference 2012
September 7, 2012
Based on the evaluation forms completed for this course offered on Friday Sept 7, 2012, the overall responses werepositive. The scale used to evaluate the event is based on a 5 point scale with 5 being Excellent, 4 being Good, 3 being Average, 2 being Fair, and 1 point equaling a Poor rating.
Written comments indicated that the knowledge obtained at the session would be used in a variety of healthcare settings to enhance patient education and implement ideas to help patients help themselves. Many expressed that they will bring this information back to their clinical setting to share with co-workers. Participants also liked that we went green and utilized thumb drives for our conference handouts. Please see attached sheet listing how the participants will use this information in their clinical settings.
The evaluation tool showed an overall rating of excellent for the combined faculty members with a group score average of 4.76out of a possible total score of 5. The overall score for the effectiveness of the various teaching methods was scored at a 4.57 out of a possible 5. Suggestions for next year include: additional use of case studies and the use of breakout sessions.
The physical environment received a total score of 4.70. Overall, the participants had positive comments to say about the venue and food provided. Several comments complemented the food and meeting. These issues will be addressed to next year...
The seminars will now be broken down by presenter. Each presenter will be evaluated based on the learner’s achievement of the learning objective and the expertise of each faculty member.
Anaphylaxis was presented by Dennis Ledford, MD and received anexcellent rating with a combined score of 4.89 for expertise of the presenter. The average combined score evaluating the objective achievements for this topic was 4.92 out of a possible 5.
What’s Bugging You: An Update in Hymenoptera Allergy was given by Jeffrey Demain, MD. Dr Demain received an excellent rating with a combined score of 4.84 out of a possible 5; The individual objectives were rated separately and then as a group with an average total score of 4.77 out of a possible score of 5.
Mastocytosiswas presented by Eric Meier, MD andhe received an excellent score with a combined score of 4.59 out of a possible 5. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was good at 4.49
Allergic to Lie’s Pleasures was presented by Luz Fonacier, MD. The excellent score for expertise of this presenter was excellent at 4.72. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an average total score of 4.70.
Eczema- What Evil Lurks in the Skinwas presented by Adrian Letz, MD and he had an excellentrating of 4.85 for his expertise. The individual objectives were rated separately and then as a group with an average total score of 4.81 out of a possible 5.
Evidenced Based Medicine and Life in the Fast Lane: waspresented by David Lang, MD. And he had an excellent rating of 4.69 for his expertise. The individual objectives were rated separately and then as a group with an average total score of 4.57 out of a possible 5,
Overall, the opening day of the Asthma and Allergy Conference was well received. The participants were able to clearly meet their objectives and personal needs. The presenters were all rated in the excellent to good range throughout the day. . The course content was rated very highly with many comments from participants supporting their ability to apply what they had learned to their clinical practice and everyday life. Please see the attached comments pages.
CEU EVALUATION SUMMARY ANALYSIS
ANP’s, CNM’s & RN’s
Asthma and Allergy Conference 2012
Evening Program
September 8, 2013
Based on the evaluation forms completed for the course offered the evening of Sept 8, 2013, the overall response was positive. The scale used to evaluate the event is based on a 5 point scale with 5 being Excellent, 4 being Good, 3 being Average, 2 being Fair, and 1 point equaling a Poor rating.
The physical environment received a total score of 4.69. The participants offered positive comments on the venue and dinner provided. Written comments indicated that this was an interesting talk for many providers. Several mentioned their intent to research the subject further..
Medical Misadventures was presented by Paul Stockler, JD. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was 4.47 out of a possible 5.0. Paul Stockler had a rating of excellent with a score of 4.63for his expertise.
CEU EVALUATION SUMMARY ANALYSIS
ANP’s, CNM’s & RN’s
Asthma and Allergy Conference 2012
September 8, 2012
Based on the evaluation forms completed for this course offered on Sept 8, 2012, the overall response was very positive. The scale used to evaluate the event is based on a 5 point scale with 5 being Excellent, 4 being Good, 3 being Average, 2 being Fair, and 1 point equaling a Poor rating.
.
Written comments indicated that the knowledge obtained at the session would be used in a variety of healthcare settings. School nurses indicated the information would be used in the front line contact with their students. Clinic nurses, ANP’s & emergency room staff reported the information would benefit & increase patient education & interaction with asthma and allergy patients as well as increase their ability to refer for immunological issues. Please see the attached listing of participant’s use of on informationprovided.
The evaluation tool showed an overall rating of excellent for the combined faculty members with a group score average of 4.81 out of a possible total score of 5. The overall score for the effectiveness of the various teaching methods was scored at a 4.82 out of a possible 5. Many attendees added written comments indicating there were a good variety of topics and speakers were well selected. Suggestions were made to add additional panel discussions and adjust the overall conference timeline.
The physical environment received a total score of 4.96. Overall, the participants had positive comments to say about the venue and food provided.
Some participants had issues with the climate control and the sound system. These will be addressed for next year.
The seminars will now be broken down by presenter. Each presenter will be evaluated based on the learner’s achievement of the learning objective and the expertise of each faculty member.
Challenges in Asthma Managementwas presented by David Lang, MD. An excellent rating with a score of 4.75 for expertise of the presenter was achieved. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was 4.57 out of a possible 5.
Pediatric Asthma Hospital Admission: Reasons for failure of outpatient managementwas presented by Thad Woodard, MD and he received an excellent score of 4.73 out of a possible 5 for expertise. The individual objectives were rated with angood total score of 4.54.
Get the Picturewas presented by Harold Cable, MD. An excellent rating with a score of 4.86 for expertise of the presenter was achieved. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was 4.79.
Corticosteroids: A Two Edged Swordwas presented by James Tracy, DO. The average score for expertise of this presenter was excellent at 4.82. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an average total score of 4.81.
Allergic Rhinitis and Conjunctivitiswas presented by Adrian Letz, MD. Dr. Letzreceived a rating of 4.8 for his expertise. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an average total score of 4.81
Clinical Cases in Hereditary Angioedema was presented by Allen Kaplan, MD. The average score for expertise of the presenter was excellent at 4.86. The subject matter was covered well with a combined average score for objectives achieved at 4.82 out of a possible 5.
Do it Yourself (DIY) Immune Deficiency was presented by Troy Torgerson, MD and he received a score of 4.87 for his expertise. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an good total score of 4.94.
Recurrent Fever: Looking for Zebras was presented by Jeffrey Demain, MD. Dr Demain received a score of 4.88 for expertise. Individual objectives were measured and then combined for an average total score of 4.89indicating that the subject matter was communicated well.
SCID: Just the Tip of the Iceberg was presented by Fatima Khan, MD. The average score for expertise of the presenters was excellent at 4.85. The average score evaluating the objective achievement for this topic was also excellent with a score of 4.81 out of 5.0.