Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Patient manikins (2)
- Simulated patients (2)
- Simulation training (2)
- Undergraduate medical education (2)
- Evaluation (1)
- Feedback (1)
- Health services research (1)
- Lecture (1)
- OP capacity (1)
- OP-Kapazität (1)
Institute
- Medizin (4)
Background: Lectures remain an important teaching method to present and structure knowledge to many students concurrently. Adequate measures are necessary to maintain the quality of the lectures. The aim of this study was to determine the impact on the lecture quality using written structured feedback and to compare the ratings of surgical lectures between students and surgical peers.
Methods: Prospective analysis of two consecutive surgical lecture series for undergraduate students at Goethe-University Medical School was performed before and after evaluation of the lecturers via independent written feedback from trained undergraduate students and surgeons. The 22-item feedback instrument covered three areas of performance: content, visualization, and delivery. Additional suggestions for improvement were provided from
both students and surgical peers who anonymously attended the lectures. The lecturers, experienced surgeons, as well as the student and peer raters were blinded in terms of the aim and content of the study. Their response to the feedback was collected using a web-based 13-item questionnaire. The Kendall’s-W coefficient was computed to calculate inter-rater reliability (IRR). Differences between ratings before and after feedback were analyzed using Student’s t-test for dependent samples. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov-test was used for independent samples.
Results: A total of 22 lectures from a possible 32 given by 13 lecturers were included and analyzed by at least three surgeons and two students. There were significant improvements in overall score as well as in the details of 9 of the 13 items were found. The average inter-rater reliability was 0.71. There were no differences in the ratings as a function of the rater’s level of expertise (peers vs. students). We found that 13/23 lecturers (56.5%) answered the questionnaire, and 92% strongly agreed that the written feedback was useful. 76.9% of the lecturers revised their lecture based on the written feedback requiring on average 112.5 min (range from 20 to 300 min).
Conclusions: Overall, this study indicates that structured written feedback provided by trained peers and students that is subsequently discussed by the lecturers concerned is a highly effective and efficient method to improve aspects of lecturing. We anticipate that structured written feedback by trained students that is discussed by the lecturers concerned will improve lecturing.
Keywords: Lecture, Feedback, Surgery, Peer-feedback, Evaluation, Undergraduate training
Purpose: Every physician must be able to sufficiently master medical emergencies, especially in medical areas where emergencies occur frequently such as in the emergency room or emergency surgery. This contrasts with the observation that medical students and young residents often feel insufficiently prepared to handle medical emergencies. It is therefore necessary to train them in the treatment of emergency patients. The aim of this study is to analyze the influence of the assignment of manikin versus simulated patients during a training for undergraduate medical students on learning outcomes and the perceived realism.
Methods: The study had a prospective cross-over design and took place in a 3-day emergency medicine training for undergraduate medical students. Students completed three teaching units (‘chest pain’, ‘impaired consciousness’, ‘dyspnea’), either with manikin or simulated patient. Using a questionnaire after each unit, overall impression, didactics, content, the quality of practical exercises, and the learning success were evaluated. The gained competences were measured in a 6-station objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) at the end of training.
Results: 126 students participated. Students rated simulated patients as significantly more realistic than manikins regarding the possibility to carry out examination techniques and taking medical history. 54.92% of the students would prefer to train with simulated patients in the future. Regarding the gained competences for ‘chest pain’ and ‘impaired consciousness’, students who trained with a manikin scored less in the OSCE station than the simulated patients-group.
Conclusion: Simulated patients are rated more realistic than manikins and seem to be superior to manikins regarding gained competence.
Purpose: Every physician must be able to sufficiently master medical emergencies, especially in medical areas where emergencies occur frequently such as in the emergency room or emergency surgery. This contrasts with the observation that medical students and young residents often feel insufficiently prepared to handle medical emergencies. It is therefore necessary to train them in the treatment of emergency patients. The aim of this study is to analyze the influence of the assignment of manikin versus simulated patients during a training for undergraduate medical students on learning outcomes and the perceived realism.
Methods: The study had a prospective cross-over design and took place in a 3-day emergency medicine training for undergraduate medical students. Students completed three teaching units (‘chest pain’, ‘impaired consciousness’, ‘dyspnea’), either with manikin or simulated patient. Using a questionnaire after each unit, overall impression, didactics, content, the quality of practical exercises, and the learning success were evaluated. The gained competences were measured in a 6-station objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) at the end of training.
Results: 126 students participated. Students rated simulated patients as significantly more realistic than manikins regarding the possibility to carry out examination techniques and taking medical history. 54.92% of the students would prefer to train with simulated patients in the future. Regarding the gained competences for ‘chest pain’ and ‘impaired consciousness’, students who trained with a manikin scored less in the OSCE station than the simulated patients-group.
Conclusion: Simulated patients are rated more realistic than manikins and seem to be superior to manikins regarding gained competence.
Hintergrund: Durch COVID-19 kam es weltweit, insbesondere in den ersten Wochen der Pandemie, zu einer Verschiebung und Absage elektiver Operationen in allen chirurgischen Fachdisziplinen. Eine Beschreibung der spezifischen Situation in gefäßchirurgischen Kliniken in Deutschland während dieser Periode ist bislang nicht erfolgt.
Ziel der Arbeit: Zweck der Befragung war die Erfassung der gefäßchirurgischen Leistungserbringung in der Zeit von März 2020 bis Dezember 2020, sowie von logistischen und infrastrukturellen Veränderungen, die sich durch die pandemische Lage ergeben hatten. Hierbei lag der Fokus der Umfrage auf der möglichst realitätsnahen Abbildung der Versorgungssituation anhand der Einschätzung der leitenden Gefäßchirurg*innen.
Material und Methoden: In Zusammenarbeit mit der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gefäßchirurgie und Gefäßmedizin (DGG) wurde das leitende ärztliche Personal von gefäßchirurgischen Einrichtungen in Deutschland aufgefordert, an der Umfrage teilzunehmen. Die Beantwortung der Fragen erfolgte anonym.
Ergebnisse: Durch COVID-19 und korrespondierende Maßnahmen kam und kommt es zu relevanten Absagen und Verschiebungen von Operationen, Verlust an Kapazitäten und einer gesteigerten Personalbelastung. Es traten im Beobachtungszeitraum verspätete Versorgungen gefäßchirurgischer Krankheitsbilder und ein gehäuftes Auftreten schwererer klinischer Stadien verglichen mit dem entsprechenden Vorjahreszeitraum auf. Betroffen sind alle Versorgungsstufen, größtenteils dauern diese Veränderungen an.
Diskussion: Um der strukturellen Schwächung und den Einschränkungen in der Patientenversorgung zu begegnen, sind klinische Abläufe, Patientenaufklärung und Priorisierung zu optimieren. Neue Konzepte wie z. B. Telemedizin und engmaschigere klinische Kontrolle sind ggf. sinnvoll. Eine erforderliche Infrastruktur für Notfallmanagement (COVID) darf im Alltag nicht die Versorgungsqualität der gefäßchirurgischen Patient*innen negativ beeinflussen.
