JEN-HUNG YANG2026-10-162026-10-162024-07-01Pure ID: 15346568Pure UUID: ca5f6546-f4ea-425d-bf99-1d917e7408d310.29060/TAPS.2024-9-3/OA3045https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85199801029https://scholars.csmu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/33181Introduction: Continuing medical education and continuing professional development activities (CME/CPD) improve the practice of medical practitioners and allowing them to deliver quality clinical care. However, the systems that oversee CME/CPD as well as the processes around design, delivery, and accreditation vary widely across countries. This study explores the state of CME/CPD in the East and South East Asian region from the perspective of medical practitioners, and makes recommendations for improvement. Methods: A multi-centre study was conducted across five institutions in Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Taiwan. The study instrument was a 28-item (27 five-point Likert scale and 1 open-ended items) validated questionnaire that focused on perceptions of the current content, processes and gaps in CME/CPD and further contextualised by educational experts from each participating site. Descriptive analysis was undertaken for quantitative data while the data from open-ended item was categorised into similar categories. Results: A total of 867 medical practitioners participated in the study. For perceptions on current CME/CPD programme, 75.34% to 88.00% of respondents agreed that CME/CPD increased their skills and competence in providing quality clinical care. For the domain on pharmaceutical industry-supported CME/CPD, the issue of commercial influence was apparent with only 30.24%-56.92% of respondents believing that the CME/CPD in their institution was free from commercial bias. Key areas for improvement for future CME/CPD included 1) content and mode of delivery, 2) independence and funding, 3) administration, 4) location and accessibility and 5) policy and collaboration. Conclusion: Accessible, practice-relevant content using diverse learning modalities offered by unbiased content providers and subject to transparent and rigorous accreditation processes with minimal administrative hassle are the main considerations for CME/CPD participants.14enjournal article