Farrar Michelle, Connolly Anne M, Lawson John, Burgess Annette, Lonergan Amy, Bye Ann M E
Department of Paediatric Neurology, Sydney Children's Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Med Educ. 2008 Sep;42(9):909-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03146.x.
Two educational methods, facilitated case discussion and a computerised tutorial, were compared for teaching about childhood epilepsy. We used a comprehensive and clinically relevant assessment method to evaluate the hypothesis that a computerised tutorial more effectively increases knowledge acquisition than a facilitated case discussion.
Paediatric trainees (n = 66) were arbitrarily allocated to facilitated case discussion or computerised tutorial. The analysis of paroxysmal events was taught by the same teacher, using a standardised protocol and principles of active learning. Outcome measures included knowledge acquisition, clinical confidence and usefulness pre- and post-teaching, and at 3 months follow-up.
Computerised tutorial participants scored significantly higher on knowledge acquisition post-teaching. There was gain in clinical confidence in both modalities post-teaching which did not differ between the groups. Confidence and knowledge were not related post-teaching. Both groups found the teaching relevant to clinical practice. However, facilitated case discussion participants rated the session as more enjoyable, and more useful in reinforcing and acquiring knowledge, and felt more motivated for further learning. At 3 months follow-up, participants in both modalities showed significant increases in knowledge acquisition, with no difference between modalities.
The computerised tutorial more effectively imparted knowledge immediately post-teaching. However, facilitated case discussion is the preferred modality in terms of participant enjoyment and perceived usefulness.
比较两种教育方法,即促进式病例讨论和计算机化教程,用于儿童癫痫教学。我们使用一种全面且与临床相关的评估方法来评估这一假设:计算机化教程比促进式病例讨论更有效地增加知识获取。
将儿科实习医生(n = 66)随机分配到促进式病例讨论组或计算机化教程组。由同一位教师使用标准化方案和主动学习原则教授阵发性事件的分析。结果指标包括教学前后以及3个月随访时的知识获取、临床信心和有用性。
计算机化教程组的参与者在教学后知识获取方面得分显著更高。两组在教学后临床信心均有所提高,且两组之间无差异。教学后信心和知识无关。两组都认为教学与临床实践相关。然而,促进式病例讨论组的参与者认为该课程更有趣,在强化和获取知识方面更有用,并且感觉更有动力进一步学习。在3个月随访时,两组参与者的知识获取均显著增加,两种方式之间无差异。
计算机化教程在教学后立即更有效地传授知识。然而,就参与者的满意度和感知有用性而言,促进式病例讨论是更受欢迎的方式。