远程医疗与面对面环境下医科学生在标准化会诊中的表现差异。

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Medical Education Online Pub Date : 2024-12-31 Epub Date: 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1080/10872981.2024.2388422
Emily M Murphy, Ariella Stein, Reshma Pahwa, Maura McGuire, Tina Kumra
{"title":"远程医疗与面对面环境下医科学生在标准化会诊中的表现差异。","authors":"Emily M Murphy, Ariella Stein, Reshma Pahwa, Maura McGuire, Tina Kumra","doi":"10.1080/10872981.2024.2388422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Telemedicine is an increasingly common form of healthcare delivery in the United States. It is unclear how there are differences in clinical performance in early learners between in-person and telemedicine encounters.</p><p><strong>Materials & methods: </strong>The authors conducted a single-site retrospective cohort study of 241 second-year medical students to compare performance between in-person and telemedicine standardized patient (SP) encounters. One hundred and twenty medical students in the 2020 academic year participated in a telemedicine encounter, and 121 medical students in the 2022 academic year participated in an in-person encounter. SPs completed a multi-domain performance checklist following the encounter, and the authors performed statistical analyses to compare student performance between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Students who completed in-person encounters had higher mean scores in overall performance (75.2 vs. 69.7, <i>p</i> < 0.001). They had higher scores in physical exam (83.3 vs. 50, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and interpersonal communication domains (95 vs. 85, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and lower scores in obtaining a history (73.3 vs. 80, <i>p</i> = 0.0025). There was no significant difference in assessment and plan scores (50 vs. 50, <i>p</i> = 0.96) or likelihood of appropriately promoting antibiotic stewardship (41.3% vs. 45.8%, <i>p</i> = 0.48).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The authors identified significant differences in clinical performance between in-person and telemedicine SP encounters, indicating that educational needs may differ between clinical environments.</p>","PeriodicalId":47656,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education Online","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Difference in medical student performance in a standardized patient encounter between telemedicine and in-person environments.\",\"authors\":\"Emily M Murphy, Ariella Stein, Reshma Pahwa, Maura McGuire, Tina Kumra\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10872981.2024.2388422\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Telemedicine is an increasingly common form of healthcare delivery in the United States. It is unclear how there are differences in clinical performance in early learners between in-person and telemedicine encounters.</p><p><strong>Materials & methods: </strong>The authors conducted a single-site retrospective cohort study of 241 second-year medical students to compare performance between in-person and telemedicine standardized patient (SP) encounters. One hundred and twenty medical students in the 2020 academic year participated in a telemedicine encounter, and 121 medical students in the 2022 academic year participated in an in-person encounter. SPs completed a multi-domain performance checklist following the encounter, and the authors performed statistical analyses to compare student performance between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Students who completed in-person encounters had higher mean scores in overall performance (75.2 vs. 69.7, <i>p</i> < 0.001). They had higher scores in physical exam (83.3 vs. 50, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and interpersonal communication domains (95 vs. 85, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and lower scores in obtaining a history (73.3 vs. 80, <i>p</i> = 0.0025). There was no significant difference in assessment and plan scores (50 vs. 50, <i>p</i> = 0.96) or likelihood of appropriately promoting antibiotic stewardship (41.3% vs. 45.8%, <i>p</i> = 0.48).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The authors identified significant differences in clinical performance between in-person and telemedicine SP encounters, indicating that educational needs may differ between clinical environments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Education Online\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Education Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2388422\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education Online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2388422","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:在美国,远程医疗是一种越来越普遍的医疗服务形式。目前尚不清楚早期学习者的临床表现在面对面接触和远程医疗接触之间有何差异:作者对 241 名二年级医学生进行了一项单点回顾性队列研究,以比较面对面和远程医疗标准化病人 (SP) 会诊的表现。2020 学年的 120 名医学生参加了远程医疗会诊,2022 学年的 121 名医学生参加了面对面会诊。医学生在会诊后填写了一份多领域表现检查表,作者对两组学生的表现进行了统计分析比较:结果:完成面谈的学生在总体表现方面的平均得分更高(75.2 vs. 69.7,p p p = 0.0025)。评估和计划得分(50 分对 50 分,p = 0.96)或适当促进抗生素管理的可能性(41.3% 对 45.8%,p = 0.48)没有明显差异:作者发现,面对面和远程医疗 SP 会诊的临床表现存在明显差异,这表明不同临床环境下的教育需求可能不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Difference in medical student performance in a standardized patient encounter between telemedicine and in-person environments.

Introduction: Telemedicine is an increasingly common form of healthcare delivery in the United States. It is unclear how there are differences in clinical performance in early learners between in-person and telemedicine encounters.

Materials & methods: The authors conducted a single-site retrospective cohort study of 241 second-year medical students to compare performance between in-person and telemedicine standardized patient (SP) encounters. One hundred and twenty medical students in the 2020 academic year participated in a telemedicine encounter, and 121 medical students in the 2022 academic year participated in an in-person encounter. SPs completed a multi-domain performance checklist following the encounter, and the authors performed statistical analyses to compare student performance between groups.

Results: Students who completed in-person encounters had higher mean scores in overall performance (75.2 vs. 69.7, p < 0.001). They had higher scores in physical exam (83.3 vs. 50, p < 0.001) and interpersonal communication domains (95 vs. 85, p < 0.001) and lower scores in obtaining a history (73.3 vs. 80, p = 0.0025). There was no significant difference in assessment and plan scores (50 vs. 50, p = 0.96) or likelihood of appropriately promoting antibiotic stewardship (41.3% vs. 45.8%, p = 0.48).

Conclusion: The authors identified significant differences in clinical performance between in-person and telemedicine SP encounters, indicating that educational needs may differ between clinical environments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Education Online
Medical Education Online EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
97
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Education Online is an open access journal of health care education, publishing peer-reviewed research, perspectives, reviews, and early documentation of new ideas and trends. Medical Education Online aims to disseminate information on the education and training of physicians and other health care professionals. Manuscripts may address any aspect of health care education and training, including, but not limited to: -Basic science education -Clinical science education -Residency education -Learning theory -Problem-based learning (PBL) -Curriculum development -Research design and statistics -Measurement and evaluation -Faculty development -Informatics/web
期刊最新文献
Medical law; promotion of medicine curriculum: a letter to editor. Tips for developing a coaching program in medical education. High- and low-achieving international medical students' perceptions of the factors influencing their academic performance at Chinese universities. A Medical Education Research Library: key research topics and associated experts. Financial barriers and inequity in medical education in India: challenges to training a diverse and representative healthcare workforce.
×
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