INTRODUCTION: Dissection workshop has never been assessed in the initial training of resident medical students in anesthesia. This work aimed at assessing the impact of this educational tool on the rates of success of the main blocks the resident in anesthesia achieved during their training. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The primary outcome measure studied in this work was the self-assessment by the resident of the rate of success of every block before and after the complementary training in regional anesthesia included dissection workshop, determined by a questionnaire sent by post at least 6 months after the teaching. Besides, the seminar was estimated at once by a questionnaire evaluating the quality as well as the interest of the education on a scale ranging from 0 to 10. RESULTS: Forty-two anesthesia residents went through the training. Thirty-four (77%) handed back the questionnaire assessing the global interest an average of 8.9 (1.4). Theoretical training received an average score of 7.7 (1.4) and dissection workshop in anatomy laboratory, a score of 7.8 (1.6). The quality of teaching methods used was marked nine (0.8). Twenty-seven residents (61.36%) mailed the questionnaire. The rate of success concerning each block in their clinical practice before and after the training is not different, only concerning the humeral canal block. CONCLUSION: Although the educational quality of the training was acknowledged as responding to the expectancies of the anesthesia residents, the dissection workshop do not meet with the expected requirements of rates improval of the different blocks part from the humeral canal one's, within this medical sample in initial training.
INTRODUCTION: Dissection workshop has never been assessed in the initial training of resident medical students in anesthesia. This work aimed at assessing the impact of this educational tool on the rates of success of the main blocks the resident in anesthesia achieved during their training. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The primary outcome measure studied in this work was the self-assessment by the resident of the rate of success of every block before and after the complementary training in regional anesthesia included dissection workshop, determined by a questionnaire sent by post at least 6 months after the teaching. Besides, the seminar was estimated at once by a questionnaire evaluating the quality as well as the interest of the education on a scale ranging from 0 to 10. RESULTS: Forty-two anesthesia residents went through the training. Thirty-four (77%) handed back the questionnaire assessing the global interest an average of 8.9 (1.4). Theoretical training received an average score of 7.7 (1.4) and dissection workshop in anatomy laboratory, a score of 7.8 (1.6). The quality of teaching methods used was marked nine (0.8). Twenty-seven residents (61.36%) mailed the questionnaire. The rate of success concerning each block in their clinical practice before and after the training is not different, only concerning the humeral canal block. CONCLUSION: Although the educational quality of the training was acknowledged as responding to the expectancies of the anesthesia residents, the dissection workshop do not meet with the expected requirements of rates improval of the different blocks part from the humeral canal one's, within this medical sample in initial training.
Authors: Gerhard Schwarz; Georg Feigl; Reinhold Kleinert; Christian Dorn; Gerhard Litscher; Andreas Sandner-Kiesling; Norbert Bock Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Mary C McCarthy; Mark R Ranzinger; Daniel J Nolan; Carie S Lambert; Manuel H Castillo Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: P Lirk; J M Colvin; M Biebl; G Mitterschiffthaler; P L Moser; I H Lorenz; C Kolbitsch Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: D Breitmeier; Y Schulz; N Wilke; K Albrecht; G Haeseler; B Panning; H D Tröger; S Piepenbrock Journal: Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 0.698