| Literature DB >> 33380859 |
Noelle Junod Perron1, Melissa Dominicé Dao2, Arabelle Rieder3, Johanna Sommer3, Marie-Claude Audétat1,3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: As the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak occurred, most structured clinical communication training were transformed from in-person to remote seminars. The aim of our study was to evaluate the usefulness and feasibility of online synchronous clinical communication training from both students' and tutors' perspectives. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study. Geneva Faculty of Medicine' 3rd year medical students and tutors involved in clinical communication were asked to respond to an online survey.Entities:
Keywords: clinical communication; online; synchronous; teaching; training
Year: 2020 PMID: 33380859 PMCID: PMC7769081 DOI: 10.2147/AMEP.S286552
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Med Educ Pract ISSN: 1179-7258
Short Description of the Different Phases of the Seminars
| Seminar 1: How to Prescribe a Medication | Seminar 2: How to Present a Case to a Supervisor |
|---|---|
| 2–3 Quiz questions on patient compliance rate | |
| Brainstorming on how to prescribe (link with a preceding seminar on how to explain in year 3)
Use of the electronic whiteboard | Brainstorm on the importance of a good case presentation
Use of the electronic whiteboard |
| Elaboration of the main steps of a medication prescription
Display steps on shared screen (word document) | Observation of a simulated encounter between a student and the patient
Screen share of the video Observation tasks: write down and organize the information given by the patient in order to be able to present the case to the supervisor |
| Recall on how to end a clinical encounter (preceding seminar in year 2)
Group brainstorming with the use of the electronic white board | Presentation of a study reporting supervisors’ expectations regarding case presentations |
| Observation of a videotaped simulated clinical encounter focusing on a medication prescription
Screen share of the video | Brainstorming on the different steps of a case presentation (based on the video and prior exercises in years 2–3 on how to write a consultation summary)
Use of the electronic whiteboard |
| Practical exercise on how to write a medication prescription (using a blank sheet)
2 examples shown on the screen Practice two by two using breakout rooms Debriefing in large group and comments on difficulties | Display of two different ways of presenting the initial complaint (1 poor and 1 good example): ask the students to identify differences
Powerpoint document shared on the screen Group discussion |
| Role play using the same clinical situation displayed in the videotaped clinical encounter and the written prescription
2–3 students in turn and the tutor playing the role of the patient Other students observing with specific tasks (on mute, no image) Debriefing in large group | Presentation of the steps of the clinical reasoning process (analytical). Powerpoint document shared on the screen |
| Observation of a videotaped interaction between the patient and the pharmacist in a pharmacy
Screen share of the video Observation tasks: dimensions of the pharmacist work (security, efficacy, economicity) Discussion in large group | Role plays using three different written vignettes
Preparation of the case presentation using breakout-rooms Role plays 3 students in turn for each vignette and the tutor playing the role of the supervisor Other students observing with specific tasks (on mute, no image) Debriefing in large group |
Notes: Italic indicates technical steps for the tutor.
Students’ and Tutors’ Comments Regarding Advantages, Disadvantages, and Suggestions Regarding Online Synchronous Clinical Communication Training/Teaching
| Examples of Students’ Comments | Examples of Tutors’ Comments | |
|---|---|---|
| Facilitating timely access | - No need to travel, easy access for those furthest away from the medical school | - No need to travel to the classroom where the students are/easy to integrate into a community teacher’s schedule |
| Maintaining the learning/teaching process | - It allows learning to continue while everything else is paused | - In times of pandemic, it is important to stay connected and maintain teaching activities |
| Keeping the link | - Keeping in touch with each other through these zooms makes me feel better | |
| Students’ attitude | - More attentive | - The students seemed more relaxed and at the same time more eager for information and more involved than usual. |
| Small group facilitation | - The possibility of dividing the class into small private groups to work independently | - To have their first name help make them participate |
| Telemedicine skills | - In the future, as part of our activities, we may have to do teleconsulting or telephone consultations, which is close in format, so it’s good to have practiced this | - Use by students of new technologies that could be useful to them in their medical practice in the future (eg, teleconsultation) |
| Technical and environmental barriers | - There may be computer or connection bugs and it is not always easy to find a quiet and isolated place | - High dependency on technical hazards |
| Loss of human contact | - Distance with teachers and other students, you stay in the virtual world | - Lack of direct contact |
| Concentration | - Students are less concentrated than in in-presence seminars | - It requires a great concentration to “hold” the students, to engage them. Exhausting |
| Small group facilitation | - More unequal student participation: normally the teacher gets everyone involved, here the shyer students are hidden by the screen | - Difficult to manage more than 8 at a time, the others “escape us” |
| - To define communication/work rules (all turn on the camera, etc.) | - Think about ways to better practice communication skills, possibly by doing small group work - group sizes were larger for the second seminar and likely made communication practice more difficult to reach (fewer people who could actively practice). |
Students’ Perceptions Regarding Online Synchronous Clinical Communication Training
| Students | S1: How to Prescribe | S2: How to Present a Case N=80 (Likert Scale 1–5)* | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median (IQR) | Mean (SD) | Median (IQR) | Mean (SD) | |
| The seminar was useful for my training | 5.00 (0) | 4.78 (0.42) | 5.00 (0) | 4.78 (0.45) |
| The topic was relevant for future practice | 5.00 (0) | 4.82 (0.63) | 5.00 (0) | 4.90 (0.30) |
| I had technical difficulties to attend the online seminar | 1.00 (0) | 1.34 (0.77) | 1.00 (1.00) | 1.76 (1.23) |
| I actively participated to the seminar | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.64 (0.56) | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.38 (0.83) |
| I could practice my communication skills | 4.00 (1.00) | 4.26 (0.80) | 4.00 (1.00) | 4.33 (0.81) |
| The tutor was well trained to deliver the seminar content | 5.00 (0) | 4.88 (0.33) | 5.00 (0) | 4.84 (0.41) |
| The tutor was comfortable in using the online platform | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.60 (0.50) | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.42 (0.76) |
| I was not disturbed by the fact that the seminar was given online | 4.50 (1.00) | 4.26 (0.96) | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.16 (1.08) |
| I prefer when these seminars are given in person and not online | 4.00 (1.00) | 3.73 (1.14) | ||
| I appreciated that the tutors used the new IT to maintain training activities during the pandemic | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.68 (0.59) | ||
| The fact that the seminars were maintained during the pandemic helped me feel less isolated in my training | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.41 (0.88) | ||
| The fact that the seminar were maintained helped me keep links with my peers | 4.00 (2.00) | 3.86 (1.03) | ||
| N (%) | ||||
| I would be interested in facilitating such online seminars outside the pandemic | 47 (60) | |||
Note: *1=totally disagree to 5=totally agree.
Tutors’ Perceptions Regarding Online Synchronous Clinical Communication Training
| Tutors | S1: How to Prescribe | S2: How to Present a Case N=8 (Likert Scale 1–5)* | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median (IQR) | Mean (SD) | Median (IQR) | Mean (SD) | |
| I had technical difficulties in facilitating the seminar | 2.00 (1.00) | 1.71(0.76) | 2.50 (2.75) | 2.38 (1.30) |
| I could actively involve the students in the seminar | 4.00 (1.00) | 3.71 (0.95) | 4.00 (2.00) | 3.88 (1.13) |
| The students could practice their communication skills | 4.00 (1.00) | 3.57 (0.54) | 4.00 (1.00) | 3.50 (1.20) |
| I was well prepared to deliver the seminar content | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.57 (0.53) | 4,00 (1.75) | 3.88 (1.36) |
| I was well prepared to use the online platform | 4.00 (1.00) | 3.71 (0.49) | 4.00 (1.50) | 3.88 (1.00) |
| I was not disturbed by the fact that the seminar was given online | 4.00 (2.00) | 3.86 (1.07) | 3.50 (2.50) | 3.50 (1.20) |
| I prefer when these seminars are given in person and not online | 4.00 (2.00) | 4.00 (1.00) | ||
| It was important to show students that training activities could be maintained during the pandemic | 5.00 (1.00) | 4.36 (1.21) | ||
| N (%) | ||||
| I would be interested in facilitating such online seminars outside the pandemic | 8 (53) | |||
Note: *1=totally disagree to 5=totally agree.