Dataset Information

Providing an interactive undergraduate elective on safety culture online - concept and evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has made it more difficult to maintain high quality in medical education. As online formats are often considered unsuitable, interactive workshops and seminars have particularly often been postponed or cancelled. To meet the challenge, we converted an existing interactive undergraduate elective on safety culture into an online event. In this article, we describe the conceptualization and evaluation of the elective.

Methods

The learning objectives of the safety culture elective remained unchanged, but the teaching methods were thoroughly revised and adapted to suit an online setting. The online elective was offered as a synchronous two-day course in winter semester 2020/21 during the "second wave" of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. At the end of each day, participating students evaluated the elective by completing an online survey. Items were rated on a six-point Likert scale. We used SPSS for data analysis.

Results

Twenty medical undergraduates completed the elective and rated it extremely positively (1.1 ± 0.2). Students regard safety culture as very important and felt the learning objectives had been achieved. Moreover, they were very satisfied with the design and content of the elective, and especially with interactive elements like role-play. Around 55% of participants would recommend continuing to offer the online elective after the pandemic.

Conclusions

It makes sense to offer undergraduate medical students online elective courses on safety culture, especially during a pandemic. The elective described here can serve as a best practice example of how to teach safety culture to undergraduates, especially when physical presence is unfeasible. Electives requiring a high degree of interaction can also function well online.

SUBMITTER: Muller A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9238086 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDecreased experiential learning opportunities exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic have increased development of online surgical educational courses. To what extent may such courses provide exposure to broad and accessible surgical education?MethodsSurge is a 6-week online surgical elective hosted within a virtual learning environment, covering all surgical specialties. Course content is mapped to the Royal College of Surgeons' Undergraduate Curriculum in Surgery. Each week consultant surgeons discuss their specialty in short videos on anatomy, pathology and lifestyle of a surgeon. Students also engage with learning activities; further reading lists; formative quizzes and live sessions including suturing practice. Participants were medical students undertaking third-year electives at the University of Sheffield. Pre- and post-course questionnaires investigated student interest in surgery, understanding of steps required to pursue a surgical career and confidence in surgical environments. Qualitative data was collected via free-text responses and analysed with content analysis. Quantitative data was collected using 5-point Likert scales (1 = Strongly Disagree; 5 = Strongly Agree) and analysed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.ResultsTwenty-two students participated in Surge over five 6-week cohorts. Examination of free-text responses revealed students gained increased understanding of available surgical career options. Students felt better informed regarding different surgical specialties (median score 2.5 vs. 4, p = 0.000) and steps required to develop a surgical portfolio (median score 2 vs. 5, p = 0.000). Additionally, confidence in understanding of relevant intraoperative steps improved (median score 3 vs. 4, p = 0.000).ConclusionThese data demonstrate Surge increased student confidence and understanding of surgical careers despite reduced in-person opportunities to engage with surgical education. Surge will continue to be developed and evaluated on a larger scale.

Project description:BackgroundAim of this observational study with a three-month follow-up was to evaluate an educational concept for risk-oriented prevention applied by fifth-year undergraduate dental students.MethodsDental students from two clinical treatment courses of the last undergraduate year were included. The subjects were divided into two groups according to their assignment to the two clinical classes. Group A received a sequence of seminars, including the basics of a risk classification system (RCS) with the theoretical background and case studies in the context of preventive dentistry. Thereby, 1) a theoretical seminar (background, RCS, cases) and 2) the transfer of the RCS on a clinical patient case chosen by the student, and its presentation within a discussion round was applied. Group B served as a comparison group with students who did not receive any of teaching events in terms of RCS. The self-perceived knowledge and importance of RCS, as well as objective knowledge (qualitative questions), were assessed with a standardized questionnaire at baseline and after 3 months.ResultsOut of 90 students at baseline, 79 (group A: 39, group B: 40) were re-evaluated after 3 months. At this follow-up, Group A estimated their confidence in handling the medication (p = 0.02), the RCS (p < 0.01), and in identifying the risk of oral diseases (p = 0.02) higher than group B. Furthermore, group A felt it was more important to identify patients at risk (p = 0.02), the risk of complications (p = 0.02) and to apply an RCS (p = 0.03). At follow-up, group A exhibited more correct answers of qualitative questions than group B regarding risk of complications (p < 0.01) and bacteremia (p < 0.01). Group A felt more confident with at-risk patients and more competent concerning RCS than group B (p < 0.01).ConclusionThe concept for educating risk-oriented prevention increased the self-perceived skills and the knowledge of undergraduate dental students after 3 months within a clinical treatment course.

Project description:BackgroundThe evaluation of undergraduate medical curricula plays a crucial role in ensuring effectiveness and helps in continuous improvement of the learning process. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of online and hybrid teaching models of the first-year MBBS curriculum in the COVID-19 era (2019-20) and the para-COVID-19 pandemic (2020-21).Study methodologyMixed methods study with CIPP model was used. Data was collected by administering a survey and focus group discussions (FGDs) with first-year students from the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 cohorts, faculty and administrators, which were recorded for analysis. Recorded lectures, guidebooks, planners, and question papers were also scrutinized for quality and adequacy. Furthermore, admission merit, module assessments, and professional examination results were compared and correlated. The learning environment was evaluated through the questionnaire (validated and used by Pakistan Medical and Dental council for inspections of medical schools) and the facilities provided in both years were juxtaposed. The study utilized NVIVO for qualitative and SPSS version 23 for quantitative data analysis.ResultsContextual analysis underscored the critical need for online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic, with provided resources being deemed sufficient. Notably, the student-faculty ratio stood at 4:1, and essential resources were readily available. The fully online batch outperformed the hybrid teaching class in 2020-21. Process analysis revealed successful session delivery in hybrid and online through webinars and Zoom, accompanied by timely provision of study guides and punctual assessments. Moreover, examination papers demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.61) in core subjects. Product analysis indicated that the 2020-21 cohort performed better in modular and professional examinations across all subjects (P < 0.01) despite their lower admission merit compared to the 2019-20 batch.ConclusionsThe study revealed challenges faced during total online teaching, highlighting knowledge and skills gaps in students. While students favored hybrid teaching for interaction, faculty preferred online strategies and suggested blended learning. The administration recognized faculty's swift transition but stressed the need for blended learning workshops and strengthening the medical education department. Recommendations include implementing blended learning strategies, conducting faculty workshops, equipping the medical education department for online teaching, and gathering student feedback after each module to enhance the curriculum.