Peeraer G, Scherpbier A J J A, Remmen R, De winter B Y, Hendrickx K, van Petegem P, Weyler J, Bossaert L
Universiteit Antwerpen, Wilrijk, Belgie.
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2007 Nov;20(3):125. Epub 2007 Nov 22.
The necessity of learning skills through "integrated skills training" at an undergraduate level has been supported by several studies. The University of Antwerp implemented undergraduate skills training in its renewed curriculum in 1998, after it was demonstrated that Flemish students did not master their medical skills as well as Dutch students who received "integrated skills training" as part of their undergraduate medical course.
The aim of this study was to compare the skill outcome levels of two different student populations: students who had been trained in basic clinical skills mainly through clinical internships in year 7 with students who had learned these skills through an integrated longitudinal programme in a special learning environment in years 1-5 prior to their internship experience.
Students of the traditional curriculum learned skills through a 75 hour programme in years 4 and 5, through plenary sessions followed by a 12 month period of internships during which skills could be further practiced. We tested this group right after completion of their internships. Students from the renewed curriculum followed a 200 hour intensive small group skills training programme offered in years 1-5. This group was tested before starting their internships.
On global OSCE-scores, renewed curriculum students had significantly higher overall scores (p<0.001) and they scored significantly higher at 6 of 15 stations. There was no significant difference at 8 stations, while traditional curriculum students scored better at station 1.
5 years and 200 hours of integrated undergraduate skills training is more effective as a method of learning basic clinical skills, compared to learning these skills through 75 hours of traditional skill training and reinforcement of these skills in 12 month clinical internships, when measured by means of an OSCE.
多项研究支持了在本科阶段通过“综合技能培训”学习技能的必要性。安特卫普大学在1998年更新的课程中实施了本科技能培训，此前有研究表明，弗拉芒学生在医学技能掌握方面不如接受“综合技能培训”作为本科医学课程一部分的荷兰学生。
本研究的目的是比较两种不同学生群体的技能成果水平：主要通过七年级临床实习接受基本临床技能培训的学生，与在实习前的1 - 5年级通过特殊学习环境中的综合纵向课程学习这些技能的学生。
传统课程的学生在四年级和五年级通过75小时的课程学习技能，通过全体会议，随后是为期12个月的实习，在此期间可以进一步练习技能。我们在他们实习结束后立即对该组进行测试。新课程的学生在1 - 5年级参加了为期200小时的强化小组技能培训课程。该组在开始实习前接受测试。
在全球客观结构化临床考试（OSCE）分数方面，新课程学生的总体得分显著更高（p<0.001），并且在15个站点中的6个站点得分显著更高。在8个站点没有显著差异，而传统课程学生在第1个站点得分更高。
通过客观结构化临床考试衡量，与通过75小时的传统技能培训并在12个月的临床实习中强化这些技能相比，5年200小时的本科综合技能培训作为学习基本临床技能的方法更有效。
