Dataset Information

Improved self- and external assessment of the clinical abilities of medical students through structured improvement measures in an internal medicine bedside course.

ABSTRACT: Bedside courses are of outstanding importance when training medical students. The fact that less and less teaching is taking place nowadays at the patient's bedside makes it all the more important that the available time be put to effective use. The aim of this study was to check whether structured improvement measures in the course (scripts, lecturer briefing, e-learning cases) would improve the abilities of the students on the basis of a subjective self-assessment as well as an external assessment by the lecturers with respect to clinical abilities.Bedside teaching takes place in the fourth study year in the Medical Clinics of the TU Munich. Both students and lecturers had the chance to hand in an anonymous, quantitative self- and external assessment of the clinical abilities of the students (German grading system) after every course date. This assessment took place online in the three categories "Medical history & examination", "Diagnosis" and "Therapy". An overall period of four semesters, each with 6 course dates, was investigated. After two of the total of four semesters in the study, the course was changed by introducing scripts, lecturer briefing as well as interactive e-learning cases. The self- and external assessment was compared both within the semester (date 1-3: A; date 4-6: B), during the course as well as before and after introducing the improvement measures ("before" (T0): SS 2012, SS 2013, "after" (T1): WS 2013/2014, SS 2014).There was a significant improvement in one's own abilities on the basis of the self-assessment within each semester when comparing the first (A) and the last (B) course dates. Moreover, there was a significant improvement in the performances in all three categories when T0 was compared with T1, from both the point of view of the students ("Medical history & examination": T0 =2.5±0.9, T1=2.2±0.7, pp<0.001; "Diagnosis" T0=3.1±1.0, T1=2.8 ±0.9, pp<0.001; "Therapy": T0=3.8±1.3, T1=3.5±1.2, pp<0.018) and in two of the three categories from the point of view of the lecturers ("Diagnosis": T0=3.0±1.0, T1=2.7±0.7, p.=0.028; "Therapy": T0=3.8±1.1, T1=3.1±1.0, p<0.001).The structured measures to improve the course including the interactive e-learning cases could have contributed to improved practical abilities with respect to the medical history and examination techniques as well as diagnostic and therapeutic thinking. The external evaluation by lecturers confirmed the improvement with respect to the diagnostic and therapeutic abilities. They only saw no dynamic change in the student's taking histories and clinical examinations.

SUBMITTER: Funger SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5003141 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Improved self- and external assessment of the clinical abilities of medical students through structured improvement measures in an internal medicine bedside course.

Fünger S M SM Lesevic H H Rosner S S Ott I I Berberat P P Nikendei C C Sonne C C

GMS journal for medical education 20160815 4

<h4>Background</h4>Bedside courses are of outstanding importance when training medical students. The fact that less and less teaching is taking place nowadays at the patient's bedside makes it all the more important that the available time be put to effective use. The aim of this study was to check whether structured improvement measures in the course (scripts, lecturer briefing, e-learning cases) would improve the abilities of the students on the basis of a subjective self-assessment as well as ...[more]

PMID: 27579359

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSitting at the bedside may strengthen physician-patient communication and improve patient experience. Yet despite the potential benefits of sitting, hospital physicians, including resident physicians, may not regularly sit down while speaking with patients.ObjectiveTo examine the frequency of sitting by internal medicine residents (including first post-graduate year [PGY-1] and supervising [PGY-2/3] residents) during inpatient encounters and to assess the association between patient-reported sitting at the bedside and patients' perceptions of other physician communication behaviors. We also assessed residents' attitudes towards sitting.DesignIn-person survey of patients and email survey of internal medicine residents between August 2019 and January 2020.ParticipantsPatients admitted to general medicine teaching services and internal medicine residents at The Johns Hopkins Hospital.Main measuresPatient-reported frequency of sitting at the bedside, patients' perceptions of other communication behaviors (e.g., checking for understanding); residents' attitudes regarding sitting.Key resultsOf 334 eligible patients, 256 (76%) completed a survey. Among these 256 respondents, 198 (77%) and 166 (65%) reported recognizing the PGY-1 and PGY-2/3 on their care team, respectively, for a total of 364 completed surveys. On most surveys (203/364, 56%), patients responded that residents "never" sat. Frequent sitting at the bedside ("every single time" or "most of the time," together 48/364, 13%) was correlated with other positive behaviors, including spending enough time at the bedside, checking for understanding, and not seeming to be in a rush (p < 0.01 for all). Of 151 residents, 77 (51%) completed the resident survey; 28 of the 77 (36%) reported sitting frequently. The most commonly cited barrier to sitting was that chairs were not available (38 respondents, 49%).ConclusionsPatients perceived that residents sit infrequently. However, sitting was associated with other positive communication behaviors; this is compatible with the hypothesis that promoting sitting could improve overall patient perceptions of provider communication.

Project description:BackgroundThe medical school admission process is complicated, perhaps reflecting unresolved debates concerning the most important skills necessary to become an ideal physician. The Goldman Medical School at Ben-Gurion University in Israel is known for placing great emphasis on the personal attributes of candidates in addition to their academic excellence. To this end, 1-h consecutive interviews are embedded in the admission process. This study aims to determine whether there is an association between candidates' personal interview ratings and the ratings assigned to these students at the conclusion of their 6th year internal medicine sub-internship.MethodsOur study sample included 136 students who were admitted to the medical school in 2015, and who completed their 6th year internal medicine sub-internship in 2019-2020. Our data were derived from the admissions information for each candidate and from structured interviews concerning medical competence and personal traits, which were completed by medical personnel who were in contact with these students during their clinical rounds.ResultsHigher interview ratings of candidates during the admission process were associated with a higher probability that students would be evaluated as top-rated internists 6 years later (Odds Ratio (OR) = 9.4, p-value = 0.049), independent of gender (OR for male vs female = 0.2, p-value = 0.025) and age (OR = 1.3 per each year, p-value = 0.115). Although significant, the numeric difference in interview rating was relatively small (median 9.5 and 9.4 for top-rated and not top-rated internists, respectively).ConclusionsOur study shows that high personal interview ratings assigned to candidates as part of the medical school admission process are predictive of high performance ratings of students after they complete their 6th year internal medicine sub-internships. These findings demonstrate the value and importance of using semi-structured personal interviews in the medical school admission process.

Project description:BackgroundThe effect of a multi-faceted handoff strategy in a high volume internal medicine inpatient setting on process and patient outcomes has not been clearly established. We set out to determine if a multi-faceted handoff intervention consisting of education, standardized handoff procedures, including fixed time and location for face-to-face handoff would result in improved rates of handoff compared with usual practice. We also evaluated resident satisfaction, health resource utilization and clinical outcomes.MethodsThis was a cluster randomized controlled trial in a large academic tertiary care center with 18 inpatient internal medicine ward teams from January-April 2013. We randomized nine inpatient teams to an intervention where they received an education session standardizing who and how to handoff patients, with practice and feedback from facilitators. The control group of 9 teams continued usual non-standardized handoffs. The primary process outcome was the rate of patients handed over per 1000 patient nights. Other process outcomes included perceptions of inadequate handoff by overnight physicians, resource utilization overnight and hospital length of stay. Clinical outcomes included medical errors, frequency of patients requiring higher level of care overnight, and in-hospital mortality.ResultsThe intervention group demonstrated a significant increase in the rate of patients handed over to the overnight physician (62.90/1000 person-nights vs. 46.86/1000 person-nights, p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in other process outcomes except resource utilization was increased in the intervention group (26.35/1000 person-days vs. 17.57/1000 person-days, p-value = 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups in medical errors (4.8% vs. 4.1%), need for higher level of care or in hospital mortality. Limitations include a dependence of accurate record keeping by the overnight physician, the possibility of cross-contamination in the handoff process, analysis at the cluster level and an overall low number of clinical events.ConclusionsImplementation of a multi-faceted resident handoff intervention did not result in a significant improvement in patient safety although did improve number of patients handed off. Novel methods to improve handoff need to be explored.Trial registrationRegistered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01796756.

Project description:Background: Inter-professional and interpersonal relationships in collaborative work environments can prove to be critical elements in healthcare practice. When implementers fail to understand the importance of a collaborative perspective, this can lead to communication problems which ultimately harm the users. Objectives: To improve the inter-professional collaborative work skills of Mexican students in their first year of medical and nursing degrees through the use of a training program geared toward development of interpersonal skills and interdisciplinary work. Methods: The sample was composed of 162 students (62 males and 99 females) from the School of Healthcare Sciences of the Autonomous University of Coahuila, Mexico. The main measures used were the Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE); the Jefferson Scale of Attitudes toward Inter-Professional Collaborative Work between Medical and Nursing Professionals (JSAPNC); and the Jefferson Scale of Lifelong Learning (JeffSPLL). The entire sample was divided into two groups (experimental and control groups). Both groups attended an extra-curricular program using a coaching methodology. In the first case the topic focused on attitudes toward inter-professional collaborative work. In the second case, the program focused on addiction. Both programs ran for 4 months. Psychometric instruments were applied at the beginning and at the end of both programs. After analyzing the reliability of the instruments, an ANOVA test was performed. Results: The control group of medical students showed a deterioration in the development of collaborative work skills (p < 0.01), whereas in the experimental group this deterioration was not present. In the experimental group of nursing students, a significant increase in the development of collaborative work skills (p < 0.05) was observed. The differences were clearly due to the professional area of study (p < 0.001). Conclusion: There are differences in collaborative work skill development among different professional areas. These differences can be reduced through the implementation of a program aimed at developing collaborative work and interpersonal skills in the early stages of training.

Dataset Information

Improved self- and external assessment of the clinical abilities of medical students through structured improvement measures in an internal medicine bedside course.

Publications

Improved self- and external assessment of the clinical abilities of medical students through structured improvement measures in an internal medicine bedside course.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets