BACKGROUND: Pain is a devastating sensation and has to be treated immediately. Therefore, we developed a training program to improve the knowledge of medical students in the field of pain medicine. In the present study, the applicability and efficacy of this training program was tested. METHODS: Half of the students attended first a training with simulated patients (SP) followed by bedside teaching (Group 1). Group 2 performed the training programs in reverse order. The evaluation based on standardized questionnaires completed by students (self-assessment) and all students took part in two practical examinations after the learning interventions. RESULTS: This study included 35 students. The quality of the simulation was evaluated by the students with average grade 1.1 (1 = very good, 6 = very bad). The practical work on the ward with patients was rated with grade 1.4 of 6, the whole course with 1.1. Students of Group A were significantly better in the final examination (grade 1.7 vs. grade 2.2, p < 0.05). To rate the improvement of skills (self-assessment) we used a Likert Scale (1 = very certain, 5 = very uncertain). The following skills were similar in both groups and significantly better after the course: taking responsibility, expert knowledge, empathy, relationship building and communication. CONCLUSIONS: Training with simulated patients in combination with small-group teaching at the bedside with real patients achieves a dramatic increase in student competence. Students prefer learning from the simulation before bedside teaching and propose to include simulation into the curricular teaching of pain medicine.
BACKGROUND:Pain is a devastating sensation and has to be treated immediately. Therefore, we developed a training program to improve the knowledge of medical students in the field of pain medicine. In the present study, the applicability and efficacy of this training program was tested. METHODS: Half of the students attended first a training with simulated patients (SP) followed by bedside teaching (Group 1). Group 2 performed the training programs in reverse order. The evaluation based on standardized questionnaires completed by students (self-assessment) and all students took part in two practical examinations after the learning interventions. RESULTS: This study included 35 students. The quality of the simulation was evaluated by the students with average grade 1.1 (1 = very good, 6 = very bad). The practical work on the ward with patients was rated with grade 1.4 of 6, the whole course with 1.1. Students of Group A were significantly better in the final examination (grade 1.7 vs. grade 2.2, p < 0.05). To rate the improvement of skills (self-assessment) we used a Likert Scale (1 = very certain, 5 = very uncertain). The following skills were similar in both groups and significantly better after the course: taking responsibility, expert knowledge, empathy, relationship building and communication. CONCLUSIONS: Training with simulated patients in combination with small-group teaching at the bedside with real patients achieves a dramatic increase in student competence. Students prefer learning from the simulation before bedside teaching and propose to include simulation into the curricular teaching of pain medicine.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bedside teaching; Curriculum innovation; Interactive medical training; Medical training; Multi-professional education; Simulated patients
Authors: Juhana Hallikainen; Olli Väisänen; Tarja Randell; Pekka Tarkkila; Per H Rosenberg; Leila Niemi-Murola Journal: Eur J Anaesthesiol Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Naileshni Singh; Alison A Nielsen; David J Copenhaver; Samir J Sheth; Chin-Shang Li; Scott M Fishman Journal: Pain Med Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Scott M Fishman; Heather M Young; Ellyn Lucas Arwood; Roger Chou; Keela Herr; Beth B Murinson; Judy Watt-Watson; Daniel B Carr; Debra B Gordon; Bonnie J Stevens; Debra Bakerjian; Jane C Ballantyne; Molly Courtenay; Maja Djukic; Ian J Koebner; Jennifer M Mongoven; Judith A Paice; Ravi Prasad; Naileshni Singh; Kathleen A Sluka; Barbara St Marie; Scott A Strassels Journal: Pain Med Date: 2013-04-11 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: S Kurz; H Buggenhagen; N Wachter; L Penzkofer; S O Dietz; T T König; M K Heinemann; A Neulen; L I Hanke; T Huber Journal: Chirurgie (Heidelb) Date: 2022-05-20