Smith Brian R, Kamoun Malek, Hickner John
B.R. Smith is professor and chair, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. M. Kamoun is professor, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. J. Hickner is head, Department of Family Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois College of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Acad Med. 2016 Jan;91(1):107-12. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000817.
To assess the current state of laboratory medicine education at U.S. medical schools.
From 2013 to 2014, the authors surveyed the appropriate dean, department chair, or undergraduate education director at each U.S. medical school accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education about the state of laboratory medicine education, curriculum and competency assessment, and barriers to education at his or her institution. The authors used descriptive statistics to analyze the results.
The authors received 98 (75%) responses. Eighty-two schools (84%) offered course work in laboratory medicine; 76 (78%) required it. The median number of hours of required course work was 12.5, with 8.0 devoted to lectures and 4.5 to small-group, problem-based learning and/or laboratory sessions. Only 8 schools required training in a clinical setting. Fewer than half reported regular, formal review of the laboratory medicine curriculum. The assessment of students' competency in laboratory medicine was rare (8 schools), and only half of respondents were aware of published curriculum guidelines. Barriers to teaching laboratory medicine included lack of sufficient time in the preclinical curriculum (86; 88%) or clinical curriculum (84; 86%), lack of knowledge of best laboratory practices by residents (70; 72%), lack of student interest (62; 63%), and lack of knowledge by attending physicians (58; 59%). Half of respondents were likely to use a national standardized examination to assess competency in laboratory medicine, if one was available.
Significant opportunities exist to improve laboratory medicine education, including in the proper use and interpretation of clinical laboratory testing.
评估美国医学院校检验医学教育的现状。
2013年至2014年,作者对经医学教育联络委员会认证的每所美国医学院校的相关院长、系主任或本科教育主任进行了调查,内容涉及检验医学教育状况、课程设置与能力评估以及其所在机构的教育障碍。作者使用描述性统计分析结果。
作者收到了98份(75%)回复。82所学校(84%)开设了检验医学课程;76所学校(78%)要求开设该课程。所需课程的中位数时长为12.5小时,其中8.0小时用于讲座,4.5小时用于小组、基于问题的学习和/或实验课程。只有8所学校要求进行临床实习培训。不到一半的学校报告对检验医学课程进行定期、正式的审查。对学生检验医学能力的评估很少见(8所学校),只有一半的受访者知晓已发布的课程指南。检验医学教学的障碍包括临床前课程(86所;88%)或临床课程(84所;86%)中时间不足、住院医师缺乏最佳检验实践知识(70所;72%)、学生兴趣缺乏(62所;63%)以及主治医师知识欠缺(58所;59%)。如果有全国标准化考试,一半的受访者可能会用其来评估检验医学能力。
在改善检验医学教育方面存在重大机遇,包括临床检验的正确使用和解读。