Papadakis M A, Kagawa M K
Department of Medicine, University of California, School of Medicine, San Francisco.
Acad Med. 1993 Nov;68(11):845-7.
Because of the great interest in developing ambulatory care components within medical school curricula, there is a need for outcome data concerning such changes.
In 1991-92, 40 third-year students at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine were assigned to the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center for their core medicine clerkships; ten of these students were exposed to ambulatory care by being assigned to medical residents who worked in a general medicine continuity clinic. The ten students in the continuity clinic and the 30 who were not were evaluated by means of their (1) final clerkship evaluation scores for overall competence, (2) performances on a standardized-patient exercise where the majority of the simulations were of ambulatory care problems, and (3) self-assessment of clinical skills and knowledge and attitudes about primary care. Student's t-test was used to determine whether there were statistically significant differences between the performances of the two groups. In addition, the students in the clinic kept diaries about their clinic experiences.
No significant difference was found between the two groups of students on the objective or subjective measures of evaluation, although the diary narratives of the clinic students revealed that they were extremely enthusiastic about the clinic experience.
Because there was no significant difference between the performances of the two student groups, the ambulatory care model in this study, despite its feasibility to implement, was not adequate to teach the students the different problem-solving and therapeutic skills necessary in the ambulatory care setting.
鉴于医学院校课程中对发展门诊护理部分有着浓厚兴趣,因此需要有关此类变化的结果数据。
1991 - 1992年,加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校医学院的40名三年级学生被分配到旧金山退伍军人事务医疗中心进行核心内科实习;其中10名学生通过被分配到在普通内科连续性诊所工作的住院医师处而接触到门诊护理。连续性诊所的10名学生和未接触门诊护理的30名学生通过以下方式进行评估:(1)最终实习评估的总体能力得分;(2)在标准化病人练习中的表现,其中大多数模拟是门诊护理问题;(3)对临床技能、知识以及对初级保健态度的自我评估。使用学生t检验来确定两组表现之间是否存在统计学上的显著差异。此外,诊所的学生记录了他们的临床经历日记。
两组学生在客观或主观评估指标上均未发现显著差异,尽管诊所学生的日记叙述表明他们对临床经历极为热情。
由于两组学生的表现没有显著差异,本研究中的门诊护理模式尽管实施起来可行,但不足以教会学生门诊护理环境中所需的不同问题解决和治疗技能。