Michael Oertel1, Martina Schmitz2, Jan Carl Becker3, Hans Theodor Eich4, Anna Schober5. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1 A1, 48149, Muenster, Germany. Michael.oertel@ukmuenster.de. 2. Institute of Anatomy and Vascular Biology, University of Muenster, Vesaliusweg 2-4, 48149, Muenster, Germany. 3. Institute of Medical Education and Student Affairs, University of Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1 A6, 48149, Muenster, Germany. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1 A1, 48149, Muenster, Germany. 5. Institute of Anatomy and Molecular Neurobiology, University of Muenster, Vesaliusweg 2-4, 48149, Muenster, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Modern impartation of both anatomic and radiation oncology (RO) knowledge in medical education enables a transfer of preclinical knowledge to clinical practice, which may be addressed by multidisciplinary concepts. The faculty's "Anatomy and imaging" course attempts to integrate RO, radiology and nuclear medicine into the preclinical curriculum. The present analysis focuses on the description of the course concept and discusses the potential didactic impact of the implementation of RO. METHODS: In total 5 semester cohorts have undertaken the course since the introduction of RO in the winter semester of 2015/2016 with 682 students participating. It is designed as a small group circuit training with a teaching content of 8 h daily. Course evaluation was performed on a 100-item Likert scale. RESULTS: General evaluation showed an average of 9.3-12.7 on a Likert scale (0 being the best, 100 being the worst grade). Use of media, relevance for medical training, gain of interest in medicine in general and overall satisfaction with the course received excellent mean values. For RO, there was a high degree of consent with the following statements: "the course was well organized", "subjects and presentation were well-structured", "topics were well chosen", "the time for exercises was sufficient" and "teaching by student tutors and physicians was adequate". CONCLUSION: The present evaluation demonstrates the feasibility of introducing RO in the preclinical part of medical education. The course concept shows excellent results in evaluation and may help in broadening RO knowledge and in recruiting new doctoral candidates and residents.
PURPOSE: Modern impartation of both anatomic and radiation oncology (RO) knowledge in medical education enables a transfer of preclinical knowledge to clinical practice, which may be addressed by multidisciplinary concepts. The faculty's "Anatomy and imaging" course attempts to integrate RO, radiology and nuclear medicine into the preclinical curriculum. The present analysis focuses on the description of the course concept and discusses the potential didactic impact of the implementation of RO. METHODS: In total 5 semester cohorts have undertaken the course since the introduction of RO in the winter semester of 2015/2016 with 682 students participating. It is designed as a small group circuit training with a teaching content of 8 h daily. Course evaluation was performed on a 100-item Likert scale. RESULTS: General evaluation showed an average of 9.3-12.7 on a Likert scale (0 being the best, 100 being the worst grade). Use of media, relevance for medical training, gain of interest in medicine in general and overall satisfaction with the course received excellent mean values. For RO, there was a high degree of consent with the following statements: "the course was well organized", "subjects and presentation were well-structured", "topics were well chosen", "the time for exercises was sufficient" and "teaching by student tutors and physicians was adequate". CONCLUSION: The present evaluation demonstrates the feasibility of introducing RO in the preclinical part of medical education. The course concept shows excellent results in evaluation and may help in broadening RO knowledge and in recruiting new doctoral candidates and residents.
Keywords:
Medical education; Preclinical curriculum; Radiation oncology; Radiologic anatomy; Teaching
Authors: Nicholas G Zaorsky; Talha Shaikh; Elizabeth Handorf; Gary Eastwick; Adam Hesney; Eli D Scher; Ryan T Jones; Timothy N Showalter; Vladimir Avkshtol; Stephanie R Rice; Eric M Horwitz; Joshua E Meyer Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jeffrey V Brower; Pranshu Mohindra; Kristin A Bradley; Daniel W Golden Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-03-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Young Suk Kim; Jun Won Kim; Won Sup Yoon; Min Kyu Kang; Ik Jae Lee; Tae Hyun Kim; Jin Hee Kim; Hyung-Sik Lee; Hee Chul Park; Hong Seok Jang; Chul Seung Kay; Sang Min Yoon; Mi-Sook Kim; Jinsil Seong Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-08-18 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: H Dapper; C Belka; F Bock; V Budach; W Budach; H Christiansen; J Debus; L Distel; J Dunst; F Eckert; H Eich; W Eicheler; R Engenhart-Cabillic; R Fietkau; D F Fleischmann; B Frerker; F A Giordano; A L Grosu; K Herfarth; G Hildebrandt; D Kaul; O Kölbl; M Krause; D Krug; D Martin; C Matuschek; D Medenwald; N H Nicolay; M Niewald; M Oertel; C Petersen; F Pohl; A Raabe; C Rödel; C Rübe; C Schmalz; L C Schmeel; D Steinmann; G Stüben; R Thamm; D Vordermark; H Vorwerk; T Wiegel; D Zips; S E Combs Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2021-11-16 Impact factor: 3.621