Sricharoen Pungkava, Yuksen Chaiyaporn, Sittichanbuncha Yuwares, Sawanyawisuth Kittisak
Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand ; The Research Center in Back, Neck, Other Joint Pain and Human Performance (BNOJPH), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2015 Feb 2;6:77-81. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S72887. eCollection 2015.
There are different teaching methods; such as traditional lectures, bedside teaching, and workshops for clinical medical clerkships. Each method has advantages and disadvantages in different situations. Emergency Medicine (EM) focuses on emergency medical conditions and deals with several emergency procedures. This study aimed to compare traditional teaching methods with teaching methods involving workshops in the EM setting for medical students.
Fifth year medical students (academic year of 2010) at Ramathibodi Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand participated in the study. Half of students received traditional teaching, including lectures and bedside teaching, while the other half received traditional teaching plus three workshops, namely, airway workshop, trauma workshop, and emergency medical services workshop. Student evaluations at the end of the clerkship were recorded. The evaluation form included overall satisfaction, satisfaction in overall teaching methods, and satisfaction in each teaching method.
During the academic year 2010, there were 189 students who attended the EM rotation. Of those, 77 students (40.74%) were in the traditional EM curriculum, while 112 students were in the new EM curriculum. The average satisfaction score in teaching method of the new EM curriculum group was higher than the traditional EM curriculum group (4.54 versus 4.07, P-value <0.001). The top three highest average satisfaction scores in the new EM curriculum group were trauma workshop, bedside teaching, and emergency medical services workshop. The mean (standard deviation) satisfaction scores of those three teaching methods were 4.70 (0.50), 4.63 (0.58), and 4.60 (0.55), respectively.
Teaching EM with workshops improved student satisfaction in EM education for medical students.
临床实习有多种教学方法,如传统讲座、床边教学和工作坊。每种方法在不同情况下都有优缺点。急诊医学(EM)专注于紧急医疗状况并涉及多种急救程序。本研究旨在比较传统教学方法与在急诊医学环境中为医学生开展工作坊的教学方法。
泰国曼谷玛希隆大学医学院拉玛提波迪医院的五年级医学生(2010学年)参与了该研究。一半学生接受传统教学,包括讲座和床边教学,而另一半学生接受传统教学加三个工作坊,即气道工作坊、创伤工作坊和紧急医疗服务工作坊。记录实习结束时学生的评价。评价表包括总体满意度、对整体教学方法的满意度以及对每种教学方法的满意度。
在2010学年,有189名学生参加了急诊医学轮转。其中,77名学生(40.74%)采用传统急诊医学课程,而112名学生采用新的急诊医学课程。新急诊医学课程组教学方法的平均满意度得分高于传统急诊医学课程组(4.54对4.07,P值<0.001)。新急诊医学课程组平均满意度得分最高的前三项是创伤工作坊、床边教学和紧急医疗服务工作坊。这三种教学方法的平均(标准差)满意度得分分别为4.70(0.50)、4.63(0.58)和4.60(0.55)。
通过工作坊教授急诊医学提高了医学生对急诊医学教育的满意度。