School of Medicine, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland 4222, Australia.
BMC Med Educ. 2014 May 2;14:90. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-14-90.
Many commencing junior doctors worldwide feel ill-prepared to deal with their new responsibilities, particularly prescribing. Simulation has been widely utilised in medical education, but the use of extended multi-method simulation to emulate the junior doctor experience has rarely been reported.
A randomised controlled trial compared students who underwent two, week-long, extended simulations, several months apart (Intervention), with students who attended related workshops and seminars alone (Control), for a range of outcome measures.
Eighty-four third year students in a graduate-entry medical program were randomised, and 82 completed the study. At the end of the first week, Intervention students scored a mean of 75% on a prescribing test, compared with 70% for Control students (P = 0.02) and Intervention teams initiated cardiac compressions a mean of 29.1 seconds into a resuscitation test scenario, compared with 70.1 seconds for Control teams (P < 0.01). At the beginning of the second week, an average of nine months later, a significant difference was maintained in relation to the prescribing test only (78% vs 70%, P < 0.01).At the end of the second week, significant Intervention vs Control differences were seen on knowledge and reasoning tests, a further prescribing test (71% vs 63% [P < 0.01]) and a paediatric resuscitation scenario test (252 seconds to initiation of fluid resuscitation vs 339 seconds [P = 0.05]).
The study demonstrated long-term retention of improved prescribing skills, and an immediate effect on knowledge acquisition, reasoning and resuscitation skills, from contextualising learning activities through extended multi-method simulation.
许多刚开始执业的年轻医生都感到自己对新职责(尤其是开处方)准备不足。模拟教学在医学教育中已得到广泛应用,但很少有报道使用扩展的多方法模拟来模拟年轻医生的经验。
一项随机对照试验比较了两组学生的学习效果,一组学生(干预组)接受了两次为期一周的扩展模拟,间隔数月;另一组学生(对照组)仅参加相关的工作坊和研讨会。研究使用了一系列结果测量指标。
84 名研究生医学项目的三年级学生被随机分组,82 名学生完成了研究。在第一周结束时,干预组学生在处方测试中平均得分为 75%,而对照组学生得分为 70%(P=0.02);干预组在复苏测试场景中开始心脏按压的平均时间为 29.1 秒,而对照组为 70.1 秒(P<0.01)。在第二周开始时,平均 9 个月后,仅在处方测试方面仍保持显著差异(78%比 70%,P<0.01)。在第二周结束时,在知识和推理测试、进一步的处方测试(71%比 63%[P<0.01])以及儿科复苏场景测试(开始补液复苏的时间为 252 秒比 339 秒[P=0.05])中,仍观察到干预组与对照组之间的显著差异。
该研究表明,通过扩展的多方法模拟来情境化学习活动,可长期保持提高的处方技能,并立即提高知识获取、推理和复苏技能。