Checklist-based training for essential clinical skills in 3 term MBBS students

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL International Journal of Academic Medicine Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.4103/IJAM.IJAM_141_20
Smitha S. Bhat
{"title":"Checklist-based training for essential clinical skills in 3 term MBBS students","authors":"Smitha S. Bhat","doi":"10.4103/IJAM.IJAM_141_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Undergraduate students find the correct sequence & method of eliciting clinical signs is ambiguous, leading to confusion & reluctance to demonstrate. The 3-term posting is the introduction to clinical skills & it is essential that bedside teaching is organized & delivered well. Studies have shown that a structured clinical training improves students' examination skills. This study aimed to estimate the difference in competence in basic physical examination in students taught by checklist-based training and those taught by standard clinical teaching. Materials and Methods: This was a randomized crossover trial conducted on 3 term MBBS students posted to medicine. Checklists for general physical examination (GPE) and vital sign examination were framed, piloted. Students were divided in to control & test groups by simple randomization. In phase 1, the control group learnt measurement of vital signs by standard clinical teaching in the units. The test group learned using checklist-based demonstration. In phase 2, the groups were interchanged and GPE was taught by checklist method in the test group .Skills were assessed by OSCE after each training. OSCE scores between control & test groups were compared and analysed. Results: Students showed significantly higher scores when GPE was taught by checklist-based method (Test 1.49, control 0.6. P – 0.000). There was no significant difference in OSCE scores in vital sign examination (Test – 1.15, Control 1.19 P – 0.378). Students found the checklist-based method systematic and easy to remember Conclusion: Checklist-based training improves student clinical learning in GPE, though not in vital sign examination. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Medical knowledge, Patient care, Practice-based learning and improvement.","PeriodicalId":36495,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Academic Medicine","volume":"7 1","pages":"150 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/IJAM.IJAM_141_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Undergraduate students find the correct sequence & method of eliciting clinical signs is ambiguous, leading to confusion & reluctance to demonstrate. The 3-term posting is the introduction to clinical skills & it is essential that bedside teaching is organized & delivered well. Studies have shown that a structured clinical training improves students' examination skills. This study aimed to estimate the difference in competence in basic physical examination in students taught by checklist-based training and those taught by standard clinical teaching. Materials and Methods: This was a randomized crossover trial conducted on 3 term MBBS students posted to medicine. Checklists for general physical examination (GPE) and vital sign examination were framed, piloted. Students were divided in to control & test groups by simple randomization. In phase 1, the control group learnt measurement of vital signs by standard clinical teaching in the units. The test group learned using checklist-based demonstration. In phase 2, the groups were interchanged and GPE was taught by checklist method in the test group .Skills were assessed by OSCE after each training. OSCE scores between control & test groups were compared and analysed. Results: Students showed significantly higher scores when GPE was taught by checklist-based method (Test 1.49, control 0.6. P – 0.000). There was no significant difference in OSCE scores in vital sign examination (Test – 1.15, Control 1.19 P – 0.378). Students found the checklist-based method systematic and easy to remember Conclusion: Checklist-based training improves student clinical learning in GPE, though not in vital sign examination. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Medical knowledge, Patient care, Practice-based learning and improvement.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对三学期MBBS学生进行基本临床技能的培训
背景:大学生发现临床症状引出的正确顺序和方法不明确,导致困惑和不愿展示。三个学期的实习是临床技能的介绍,床边教学的组织和交付是至关重要的。研究表明,结构化的临床训练可以提高学生的考试技能。摘要本研究旨在探讨以检查表教学法教学之学生与临床标准教学法教学之学生基本体格检查能力之差异。材料和方法:这是一项随机交叉试验,对3名MBBS学期在校生进行了研究。制定并试行了一般体格检查和生命体征检查清单。采用简单随机法将学生分为对照组和试验组。在第一阶段,对照组通过单位的标准临床教学学习生命体征的测量。测试组使用基于检查表的演示进行学习。第二阶段,两组互换,试验组采用检查表法进行GPE教学,每次培训后由欧安组织进行技能评估。对照组和实验组之间的OSCE评分进行比较和分析。结果:采用清单教学法进行GPE教学的学生成绩显著提高(Test 1.49, control 0.6)。P - 0.000)。两组生命体征检查的OSCE评分差异无统计学意义(Test - 1.15, Control - 1.19 P - 0.378)。结论:基于核对表的训练对GPE学生的临床学习有促进作用,但对生命体征检查没有促进作用。本文讨论了以下核心能力:医学知识、患者护理、基于实践的学习和改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Academic Medicine
International Journal of Academic Medicine Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Postoperative urinary retention in colorectal surgery patients on an enhanced surgical recovery pathway Pap smear changes and cervical inflammation in women with infertility in correlation to clinical and microbiological findings Investigating molecular features that influence blood − brain barrier permeability of compounds Association between cumulative fluid balance and clinical outcome in patients with septic shock: A retrospective observational study Comparison of liquid-based cytology and conventional preparations in nongynecological cytology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1