{"title":"Patient-management problem in the evaluation of intensive medicine.","authors":"Ahlem Trifi, Aida Benzarti, Asma Mehdi, Eya Seghir, Lynda Messaoud, Sami Abdellatif","doi":"10.62438/tunismed.v102i4.4537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In intensive care medicine (ICM), the use of Patient-Management Problem (PMP) remains limited and no feedback from students is available.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the feasibility of employing PMP referring to clinical cases (CC) as assessment tools for appraising the knowledge and competencies in ICM students; and to gather the students' perception regarding this experience.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>it was a cross-sectional randomized trial. Were included, external students in the 3rd year of the 2nd cycle of medical studies (3rd-SCMS) during their ICM externship. All the participants underwent two random draws (the 1st one for assessment tool to be started (PMP or CC) and the 2nd for the passage order for PMP. Two PMPs versus two grouped QCMs-CC were prepared and a satisfaction questionnaire was distributed. The main judgment criterion was the effect of each assessment tool on the students' decision-making process. This focused on the relevance of the elements provided by each technique, the implication and the difficulty felt. The secondary endpoint was the scores taken for each tool tested.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>20 students were included. All participants had previous experience with PMPs and only nine were familiar with grouped MCQs-CC. PMP scores were 14.9 for the 1st theme and 15.8 for the 2nd theme. The median of the grouped MCQs-CC scores was 14 [12-16] for both. The scores didn't differ between the two techniques. For the 1st theme: the scores were negatively correlated (r=-0.58 and p=0.007). Students felt a better satisfaction for PMP evaluation (p<10-3), the elements provided by PMP were more relevant for decision-making process (p<10-3), the involvement was more felt with PMP (p<10-3) and difficulty was more felt with CCs (p<10-3). The effect of PMP was found to be significant on clinical reasoning (n=36), self-assessment (n=38), problem solving (n=40) and decision making (n=39). Students recommended strongly PMP as a tool of evaluation in ICM (p<10-3).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>scores were comparable between the two tested techniques. The positive perception of students regarding PMP encourages its generalization and teacher training must be strengthened.</p>","PeriodicalId":38818,"journal":{"name":"Tunisie Medicale","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11358768/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tunisie Medicale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62438/tunismed.v102i4.4537","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: In intensive care medicine (ICM), the use of Patient-Management Problem (PMP) remains limited and no feedback from students is available.
Aim: To compare the feasibility of employing PMP referring to clinical cases (CC) as assessment tools for appraising the knowledge and competencies in ICM students; and to gather the students' perception regarding this experience.
Methods: it was a cross-sectional randomized trial. Were included, external students in the 3rd year of the 2nd cycle of medical studies (3rd-SCMS) during their ICM externship. All the participants underwent two random draws (the 1st one for assessment tool to be started (PMP or CC) and the 2nd for the passage order for PMP. Two PMPs versus two grouped QCMs-CC were prepared and a satisfaction questionnaire was distributed. The main judgment criterion was the effect of each assessment tool on the students' decision-making process. This focused on the relevance of the elements provided by each technique, the implication and the difficulty felt. The secondary endpoint was the scores taken for each tool tested.
Results: 20 students were included. All participants had previous experience with PMPs and only nine were familiar with grouped MCQs-CC. PMP scores were 14.9 for the 1st theme and 15.8 for the 2nd theme. The median of the grouped MCQs-CC scores was 14 [12-16] for both. The scores didn't differ between the two techniques. For the 1st theme: the scores were negatively correlated (r=-0.58 and p=0.007). Students felt a better satisfaction for PMP evaluation (p<10-3), the elements provided by PMP were more relevant for decision-making process (p<10-3), the involvement was more felt with PMP (p<10-3) and difficulty was more felt with CCs (p<10-3). The effect of PMP was found to be significant on clinical reasoning (n=36), self-assessment (n=38), problem solving (n=40) and decision making (n=39). Students recommended strongly PMP as a tool of evaluation in ICM (p<10-3).
Conclusion: scores were comparable between the two tested techniques. The positive perception of students regarding PMP encourages its generalization and teacher training must be strengthened.