Suppr超能文献

理论导向教学:在住院医师中实施临床推理课程。

Theory-guided teaching: Implementation of a clinical reasoning curriculum in residents.

机构信息

New York University School of Medicine , New York , NY , USA.

Department of Medicine, NYC Health and Hospitals Bellevue , New York , NY , USA.

出版信息

Med Teach. 2019 Oct;41(10):1192-1199. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2019.1626977. Epub 2019 Jul 9.

Abstract

Educators have theorized that interventions grounded in dual process theory (DPT) and script theory (ST) may improve the diagnostic reasoning process of physicians but little empirical evidence exists. In this quasi-experimental study, we assessed the impact of a clinical reasoning (CR) curriculum grounded in DPT and ST on medicine residents participating in one of three groups during a 6-month period: no, partial, or full intervention. Residents completed the diagnostic thinking inventory (DTI) at baseline and 6 months. At 6 months, participants also completed a post-survey assessing application of concepts to cases. There was a significant difference between groups in application of concepts (no intervention 1.6 (0.65) compared to partial 2.3 (0.81) and full 2.2 (0.91),  = 0.05), as well as describing cases in problem representation format (no intervention 1.2 (0.38) and partial 1.5 (0.55) compared to full 2.1 (0.93),  = 0.004). There was no significant difference in change in DTI scores (no intervention 7.0 (16.3), partial 8.8 (9.8), full 7.8 (12.0)). Residents who participated in a CR curriculum grounded in DPT and ST were effective in applying principles of CR in cases from their practice. To our knowledge, this is the first workplace-based CR educational intervention study showing differences in the reasoning process residents apply to patients.

摘要

教育工作者推测,基于双加工理论(DPT)和脚本理论(ST)的干预措施可能会改善医生的诊断推理过程,但实证证据很少。在这项准实验研究中,我们评估了基于 DPT 和 ST 的临床推理(CR)课程对参与为期 6 个月的三个小组之一的医学住院医师的影响:无、部分或全面干预。住院医师在基线和 6 个月时完成诊断思维量表(DTI)。在 6 个月时,参与者还完成了一项评估概念在病例中应用的后测调查。在概念应用方面,各组之间存在显著差异(无干预组 1.6(0.65)与部分干预组 2.3(0.81)和完全干预组 2.2(0.91),  = 0.05),以及以问题表示格式描述病例(无干预组 1.2(0.38)和部分干预组 1.5(0.55)与完全干预组 2.1(0.93),  = 0.004)。DTI 评分变化无显著差异(无干预组 7.0(16.3),部分干预组 8.8(9.8),完全干预组 7.8(12.0))。参与基于 DPT 和 ST 的 CR 课程的住院医师能够有效地将 CR 原则应用于他们实践中的病例。据我们所知,这是第一项基于工作场所的 CR 教育干预研究,表明住院医师对患者应用推理过程的差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验