| Literature DB >> 33272253 |
Charle André Viljoen1,2,3, Rob Scott Millar4,5, Kathryn Manning5, Vanessa Celeste Burch5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most medical students lack confidence and are unable to accurately interpret ECGs. Thus, better methods of ECG instruction are being sought. Current literature indicates that the use of e-learning for ECG analysis and interpretation skills (ECG competence) is not superior to lecture-based teaching. We aimed to assess whether blended learning (lectures supplemented with the use of a web application) resulted in better acquisition and retention of ECG competence in medical students, compared to conventional teaching (lectures alone).Entities:
Keywords: Blended learning; Electrocardiography; Medical students
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33272253 PMCID: PMC7713171 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02403-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Fig. 1Outline of study design
Comparison of the web application used in this study (ECG ONLINE) and undergraduate ECG teaching software previously described in the literature
| Author | Viljoen | Akbarzadeh | Chudgar | Davies | Fent | Montassier | Nilsson | Patuwo | Rui | Sonali |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference number | Index study | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ |
| Online lecture / video | X | X | ||||||||
| Online text / images | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ? | ||
| Systematic analysis (step by step approach) | X | X | ||||||||
| Practice / quiz with feedback | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
| Case scenarios | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Simulation | X | X | ||||||||
| Online chat rooms | X | |||||||||
| Basic principles / pathophysiology | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |
| Normal ECG | X | X | X | |||||||
| Normal / Abnormal rhythms | X | X | X | X | ? | X | ||||
| Normal / Abnormal waveforms | X | X | X | X | X | ? | X | |||
| Blended learning (e-learning in addition to lectures) | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Unrestricted access | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Level 1: Participants’ reactions | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||
| Level 2a: Modifications of attitudes and perceptions | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Level 2b: Acquisition of knowledge and skills | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |
Immediately after educational intervention (acquisition of ECG competence) | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |
Delayed testing after educational intervention (retention of ECG competence) | X | X | ||||||||
X = described by authors
? = not specifically mentioned, but implied by the text
Fig. 2The web application was accessed throughout the day, but peaked around midday and early evening
The effect of blended learning versus conventional teaching on ECG competence
| Conventional teaching | Blended learning | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-intervention test | 31.2 (11.5) | 31.0 (13.2) | 0.917 |
| Immediate post-intervention test | 50.3 (17.1) | 75.3 (16.2) | < 0.001 |
| Delayed post-intervention test | 37.6 (16.4) | 57.7 (18.5) | < 0.001 |
| Pre-intervention test | 31.8 (27.5) | 37.5 (25.6) | 0.225 |
| Immediate post-intervention test | 57.2 (25.2) | 68.6 (22.9) | 0.007 |
| Delayed post-intervention test | 37.6 (16.4) | 54.2 (26.9) | < 0.001 |
| Pre-intervention test | 33.9 (15.5) | 34.7 (15.9) | 0.759 |
| Immediate post-intervention test | 47.3 (22.4) | 73.3 (22.0) | < 0.001 |
| Delayed post-intervention test | 38.4 (19.0) | 59.0 (21.5) | < 0.001 |
| Pre-intervention test | 27.4 (14.8) | 27.4 (17.3) | 0.990 |
| Immediate post-intervention test | 51.4 (19.2) | 78.6 (17.9) | < 0.001 |
| Delayed post-intervention test | 37.9 (20.3) | 57.3 (22.5) | < 0.001 |
SD Standard deviation
*Unpaired T test of the difference in the mean scores between the cohorts exposed to blended learning and conventional teaching respectively
†Calculating the QRS rate, measuring the QRS width and determining the QRS axis
‡Sinus arrhythmia, sinus arrest with escape rhythm, first degree AV block, Mobitz type I second degree AV block, Mobitz type II second degree AV block, third degree AV block, atrial fibrillation with uncontrolled rate, atrial fibrillation with normal rate, atrial flutter, AV node re-entry tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation
§Left anterior fascicular block, left bundle branch block, right bundle branch block, left atrial enlargement, right atrial enlargement, left ventricular hypertrophy, right ventricular hypertrophy, anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), inferior STEMI, pericarditis, hyperkalaemia and long QT syndrome
Fig. 3Learning and attrition with blended learning versus conventional teaching
The effect of blended learning versus conventional teaching on diagnostic uncertainty and accuracy
| Conventional teaching | Blended learning | |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-intervention test | 415 / 1876 (22.1%) | 492 / 1792 (27.5%) |
| Immediate post-intervention test | 133 / 1876 (7.1%) | 69 / 1792 (3.9%) |
| Delayed post-intervention test | 121 / 1876 (6.4%) | 120 / 1792 (6.7%) |
| Immediate post-intervention test | 168 / 415 (40.5%) b | 360 / 492 (73.2%) c |
| Delayed post-intervention test | 113 / 415 (27.2%) b | 251 / 492 (51.0%) c |
aDiagnostic uncertainty was calculated as the percentage of “I do not know the answer” responses that were selected by each cohort in the 28 item ECG competence tests
bBased on the 415 responses for which participants in the conventional teaching cohort (N = 67) selected “I do not know the answer” in the pre-intervention ECG competence test
cBased on the 492 responses for which participants in the blended learning cohort (N = 64) selected “I do not know the answer” in the pre-intervention ECG competence test
The effect of blended learning versus conventional teaching on confidence and competence in ECG analysis and interpretation
| Confidence | Competence | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Statements used to express confidence | Conventional teaching | Blended | Test items used to measure competence | Conventional teaching | Blended | ||
| “I find ECG analysis and interpretation difficult” | 53.7% | 18.8% | < 0.001 | Basic analysis (QRS rate, width and axis) and rhythm and waveform abnormalities a | 50.3% | 75.2% | < 0.001 |
| “I am confident in analysing an ECG with bradycardia” | 91.0% | 93.8% | 0.560 | Sinus arrest with escape rhythm, Mobitz type I and II second degree AV block, third degree AV block, hyperkalaemia | 41.2% | 75.6% | < 0.001 |
| “I am confident in analysing an ECG with tachycardia” | 89.6% | 84.4% | 0.378 | Atrial fibrillation with uncontrolled rate, atrial flutter, AV node re-entry tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia | 45.8% | 57.3% | 0.021 |
| “I am confident in analysing an ECG with an irregular rhythm” | 56.7% | 62.5% | 0.500 | Sinus arrhythmia, Mobitz type I and II second degree AV block, atrial fibrillation with controlled and uncontrolled rate | 50.4% | 77.3% | < 0.001 |
| “I am confident in analysing the P wave” | 64.1% | 93.8% | < 0.001 | Left and right atrial enlargement | 58.2% | 84.4% | < 0.001 |
| “I am confident in analysing the PR interval” | 49.3% | 64.1% | 0.087 | First degree AV block, Mobitz type I second degree AV block, third degree AV block | 44.8% | 81.3% | < 0.001 |
| “I am confident in analysing the QRS morphology” | 9.0% | 56.3% | < 0.001 | Left and right bundle branch block, Wolff-Parkinson-White pattern, left and right ventricular hypertrophy | 53.2% | 77.1% | < 0.001 |
| “I am confident in analysing the ST segment” | 41.8% | 67.2% | 0.004 | Anterior and inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), pericarditis | 46.2% | 78.6% | < 0.001 |
aSinus arrhythmia, sinus arrest with escape rhythm, first degree atrioventricular (AV) block, Mobitz I and II second degree AV block, third degree AV block, atrial fibrillation with controlled and uncontrolled rates, atrial flutter, AV node re-entry tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation, left and right atrial enlargement, left and right ventricular hypertrophy, left and right bundle branch block, left anterior fascicular block, Wolff-Parkinson-White pattern, anterior and inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), pericarditis, hyperkalaemia, long QT syndrome
Themes and subthemes of what participants liked about the lectures
| Theme | Subtheme | Number of mentions | Example of feedback | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT | BL | |||
| Method of instruction | Systematic / stepwise approach | 14 | 19 | “Breakdown of ECGs such that there is a step by step approach” “Teaching was delivered in a systematic way that is easy to reproduce and most of the time leads you to the correct diagnosis” |
| Interactive | 12 | 9 | “Able to ask questions and receive an answer” “I was also afforded an opportunity to ask questions if I didn’t understand” | |
| Supervised practice | 3 | 2 | “We got to participate in interpreting ECG with the supervision of a skilled clinician” | |
| Well-paced delivery | 2 | 3 | “Taught at a pace that I could follow” | |
| Simplifying concepts | 13 | 10 | “They made hard concepts more simple” | |
| Taught to understand mechanisms instead of memorising patterns | 1 | 6 | “The explanations of why patterns/ changes arise in certain conditions helped me to remember them” “If I understand how the condition works, I find that I am able to retain the information” | |
| Visual orientation | 0 | 3 | “I liked that it was very visual” | |
| Contextualised | 3 | 3 | “Use of real life ECGs as examples” | |
| Scaffolded learning | 4 | 0 | “It allowed me to build on my previous knowledge of ECG’s” | |
| Blended learning | N/A | 18 | “I enjoyed the combination of the online component to the ECG lecture teaching as I got to apply my knowledg.” | |
| Lecturer attributes | Insight to level of student understanding | 4 | 4 | “It seemed like he understood what we could possibly misunderstand and catered for it in his explanations” |
| Enthusiasm | 2 | 3 | “It was enthusiastically taught” | |
| Skilled teacher | 3 | 1 | “Great presenting and explanation” | |
| Engagement | 0 | 2 | “I enjoyed the way … teaches and his willingness to explain to students” | |
| Learning environment | Safe learning space | 1 | 1 | “The lecturers were conducted in a student friendly manner and created a safe learning space” |
| Clinical application | 0 | 1 | “I enjoyed being able to actually interpret ECGs and use them as a tool to diagnose patients” | |
BL Blended learning; CT Conventional teaching; N/A Not applicable
Themes and subthemes of what participants disliked about the lectures
| Theme | Subtheme | Number of mentions | Example of feedback | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT | BL | |||
| Lecture time | Too long | 5 | 14 | “Lectures were too long. They should have been broken up into 3 or 4 shorter sessions” |
| Too short | 15 | 6 | “I did not like the fact that we had to learn such a crucial skill in such a short amount of time” | |
| Too few | 10 | 5 | “Sporadic”, “Too few” | |
| End of day | 2 | 4 | “Time slots in afternoon for ECG teaching can be tiring and I tended to lose focus at times during the teaching” | |
| Too late in clerkship | 0 | 4 | “I would have loved to have had [ECG teaching] earlier during the rotation” | |
| Method of instruction | Content overload | 5 | 8 | “Too much information was covered in one go, therefore making it difficult to digest the information given” |
| Lack of opportunity to practice in class | 8 | 1 | “The information was not retained because we couldn’t practice” | |
| Focus on summative assessment | 1 | 0 | “ECG teaching at the moment is very much for exam and test purposes” | |
| Material not available for preparation | 2 | 1 | “Although it would have been more helpful if we had access to the notes before and after in order to read up beforehand” | |
| Large group instruction | 3 | 0 | “There were too many of us present” | |
| Lecturer attributes | Lecturer failed to gauge if students understood content | 3 | 0 | “Probing for understanding was not done in class” |
| Student attributes | Afraid of participation in front of peers | 4 | 0 | “Sometimes you are scared to ask questions because you don’t know how to phrase your confusion” |
| Attrition of knowledge | 4 | 0 | “At the time, they made sense, but I forgot many things” | |
BL Blended learning; CT Conventional teaching; N/A Not applicable
Themes and subthemes of what participants liked about the web application
| Theme | Subtheme | Number of mentions | Example of feedback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Method of instruction | Systematic / stepwise approach | 30 | “It helped me develop a method of approaching ECGs more systematically” “The fact that it takes you through an ECG in a step wise process - it teaches you a method” |
| Deliberate practice | 5 | “it is possible to practice lots of ECG interpretations” | |
| Immediate feedback | 18 | “I loved … the fact that you get immediate feedback on answers” “The best part was having such immediate feedback … I learnt from my mistakes straight away without wondering where I went wrong or forgetting to follow up with a lecturer” | |
| Downloadable notes on ECGs | 24 | “The take home message diagrams and pictures were so useful in understanding and not just rote learning information” “I liked the take home messages. They were explained in a way that encouraged thinking into the pathology behind the pattern and not just pattern recognition” | |
| Liberal use of examples | 7 | “It has taught me a lot of things about different ECGs” “The wide variety of ECGs” | |
| Revision | 3 | “Being able to review ECGs you have previously analysed” | |
| Asynchronous learning opportunities | Learning at own pace | 4 | “I could learn on my own at my own pace” |
| Accessible where convenient | 3 | “Being able to access the tool off-campus” | |
| Accessible when convenient | 2 | “It is something that you can access at anytime” | |
| Features of web application | User friendly | 8 | “Well-structured and easy to follow” |
| Web page layout | 2 | “I enjoyed the layout of the ECG online website” | |
| Zoom function | 1 | “The ability to zoom easily on ECGs” |
Themes and subthemes of what participants disliked about the web application
| Theme | Subtheme | Number of mentions | Example of feedback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Method of instruction | ECG analysis too detailed | 9 | “Too many options to choose from. Overwhelming” |
| ECG analysis laborious | 6 | “It took a long time to complete one ECG” | |
| Inadequate feedback | 7 | “I did not like the fact that, the feedback only showed the correct answers and there was no explanation on how to get the answers” | |
| No point of reference | 2 | “There was no place on the website that you could go back and look if you did not know what the morphology looked like” | |
| Limited number of examples | 2 | “I wish there were more examples” | |
| Features of web application | Bugs and glitches | 10 | “There were some glitches when it wouldn’t work” |
| Web page layout | 13 | “I think the layout can be improved a bit more” |