O'Malley P G, Kroenke K, Ritter J, Dy N, Pangaro L
Department of Medicine, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Acad Med. 1999 Feb;74(2):186-91. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199902000-00017.
To determine what learners and teachers value most in ambulatory learning encounters and whether the choices of the two groups are in concordance.
In 1996, the authors surveyed learners and teachers at a walk-in clinic immediately after each of 103 consecutive learning encounters. The participants answered two open-ended questions: (1) What was the one most valuable aspect of this learning encounter? and (2) List one thing that would make it better. Using qualitative analysis methods, two raters categorized the responses; their agreement was substantial (kappa = .75).
Half the responses fit five categories: diagnosis (15%), general management (14%), physical examination skills (9%), patient selection (6%), and time issues (6%). The participants most valued general exposure to diagnosis (29%) and general management issues (29%). Regarding their suggestions for improving the encounters, 33% cited structural issues (often "more time"), while 43% had no suggestions ("nothing" or "fine as is"). Substantial concordance existed between the rankings by category of the teachers' and learners' comments, but (1) learners were more likely to rate the educational value of the encounter excellent or very good (64% vs 47%, p < .01); (2) teachers were more likely than medical students (but not interns) to place the most educational value on the physical examination (30% vs 4%, p = .001); and (3) agreement on what was most valuable in any individual encounter was poor (kappa = .03).
In evaluating ambulatory educational encounters, learners and teachers placed highest value on general exposure to diagnosis and disease management; while the most commonly recommended changes related to structural issues, particularly inadequate time. While learners and teachers agreed in general on the relative ranking of teaching activities, they often found different things to be educationally salient in a particular encounter.
确定学习者和教师在门诊学习交流中最看重的内容,以及两组人员的选择是否一致。
1996年,作者在一家无需预约的诊所连续进行了103次学习交流后,立即对学习者和教师进行了调查。参与者回答了两个开放式问题:(1)这次学习交流中最有价值的一个方面是什么?(2)列出一件能使其变得更好的事情。采用定性分析方法,两名评分者对回答进行分类;他们的一致性很高(kappa系数=0.75)。
一半的回答可归为五类:诊断(15%)、综合管理(14%)、体格检查技能(9%)、患者选择(6%)和时间问题(6%)。参与者最看重对诊断(29%)和综合管理问题(29%)的总体接触。关于他们对改善交流的建议,33%提到了结构问题(通常是“更多时间”),而43%没有建议(“没有”或“就这样挺好”)。教师和学习者评论按类别排名之间存在显著一致性,但(1)学习者更有可能将交流的教育价值评为优秀或非常好(64%对47%,p<0.01);(2)教师比医学生(但不是实习生)更有可能将最大的教育价值放在体格检查上(30%对4%,p=0.001);(3)对于任何一次具体交流中最有价值的内容,一致性较差(kappa系数=0.03)。
在评估门诊教育交流时,学习者和教师最看重对诊断和疾病管理的总体接触;而最常被推荐的改进与结构问题有关,尤其是时间不足。虽然学习者和教师在教学活动的相对排名上总体一致,但他们经常在一次特定交流中发现不同的内容具有教育显著性。