Carney Patricia A, Eliassen M Scottie, Pipas Catherine F, Genereaux Stephen H, Nierenberg David W
Department of Community and Family Medicine, Dartmouth Medical School, Lebanon, New Hampshire 03756, USA.
Acad Med. 2004 Jan;79(1):69-77. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200401000-00016.
Little is known about how different ambulatory sites compare as clinical educational settings. The authors used students' log data to compare the educational content and processes in academic medical center-based clinics (AMCs), affiliated residency teaching sites (ARTs), and local community-based practices (CBPs) at one medical school.
Students recorded their experiences with symptoms, counseling, procedures, and common medical conditions as well as characteristics of the learning process during a required eight-week third-year ambulatory clerkship in family medicine. Descriptive statistics, chi-square for differences in categorical variables, and analysis of variance and multivariate analysis of variance for differences in continuous variables were used to compare the educational settings.
Over 9,000 encounters were analyzed; 29.7% occurred in AMCs, 14.8% in ARTs, and 55.5% in CBPs. The proportion of continuity visits was lowest in the AMCs and highest in CBPs (13% versus 22%, respectively; p <.01). Students saw almost 57,000 symptoms and conditions. Of 19 symptoms compared, seven differed significantly among the three settings: back pain, cough, dyspnea, ENT (ears, nose, throat problems), fatigue, knee pain, and vomiting. All but one of these were least likely to occur in ARTs. Procedures were performed more frequently, whereas counseling skills were called upon less frequently in CBPs. Students reported being more likely to work unobserved while conducting physical examinations in ARTs and CBPs. Amount of feedback provided on clinical skills did not differ, but students reported receiving more teaching about patient management in ARTs and AMCs versus CBPs (74%, 72%, and 66% of encounters, respectively; p <.01).
Academic and community settings can complement each other as learning sites for an ambulatory clerkship in family medicine, and common curricular expectations can be achieved. Settings' differences and similarities should be taken into account when developing, implementing, or revising clerkship programs and should be considered with students' interests and previous clinical experiences before assigning students to a teaching site.
关于不同门诊场所作为临床教育环境的比较情况,人们了解甚少。作者利用学生的日志数据,对一所医学院校的学术医学中心诊所(AMC)、附属住院医师教学点(ART)和当地社区诊所(CBP)的教育内容和过程进行了比较。
在为期八周的三年级家庭医学门诊实习中,学生记录了他们遇到的症状、咨询、操作以及常见病症,还有学习过程的特点。采用描述性统计、分类变量差异的卡方检验、连续变量差异的方差分析和多变量方差分析来比较不同的教育场所。
共分析了9000多次诊疗;29.7%发生在AMC,14.8%发生在ART,55.5%发生在CBP。连续性就诊比例在AMC中最低,在CBP中最高(分别为13%和22%;p<.01)。学生们共观察到近57000种症状和病症。在比较的19种症状中,有7种在三种场所之间存在显著差异:背痛、咳嗽、呼吸困难、耳鼻喉(耳、鼻、喉问题)、疲劳、膝盖疼痛和呕吐。除一种症状外,其他所有症状在ART中出现的可能性最小。在CBP中操作更频繁,而咨询技能的运用频率较低。学生报告称,在ART和CBP进行体格检查时,他们更有可能在无人监督的情况下工作。在临床技能方面提供的反馈量没有差异,但学生报告称,与CBP相比,他们在ART和AMC中接受的患者管理教学更多(分别为74%、72%和66%的诊疗;p<.01)。
学术和社区场所可作为家庭医学门诊实习的学习场所相互补充,并可实现共同的课程期望。在制定、实施或修订实习计划时,应考虑场所的差异和相似之处,在将学生分配到教学场所之前,还应结合学生的兴趣和以往临床经验进行考虑。