Pia Djermester1, Christian Gröschke2, Robert Gintrowicz1, Harm Peters3, Antje Degel1,4. 1. Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Prodekanat für Studium und Lehre, Berlin, Germany. 2. Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln, Klinik für Innere Medizin, Berlin, Germany. 3. Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Dieter Scheffner Fachzentrum für medizinische Hochschullehre und evidenzbasierte Ausbildungsforschung, Berlin, Germany. 4. Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Med. Klinik für Kardiologie, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
Introduction: The Corona virus pandemic rendered most live education this spring term impossible. Many classes were converted into e-learning formats. Teaching at the bedside (BST) seemed unfeasible under the circumstances. BST and clinical reasoning as its major outcome is introduced at the beginning of semester 5, henceforth all BST refers to this first presentation. Project outline: To ensure proficiency of current 5th semester students in future BST sessions, the introduction could not be cancelled albeit teaching with patients was. Knowing that the practical learning objectives of bedside teaching cannot be mirrored in online formats, a compensating module to teach the concept of BST and clinical reasoning had to be designed. Summary of work: To facilitate an understanding of the concept of bedside teaching with a focus on clinical reasoning we developed paper cases and a survey in Microsoft Forms following the history and examination path used in live BST with the addendum of clinical reasoning tables. For the first paper case, a personal feedback was provided for the clinical reasoning tables. A sample solution was provided later for self-feedback on the whole case. The first case was completed by 87, the second by 40 of 336 students. Response to individual feedback was positive. Students still missed hands-on training in history taking and examination with patients. Discussion: Paper cases cannot fully substitute BST. However, given the prime directive during the pandemic to protect our patients, this module engaged around one third of the cohort. The review of uploaded clinical reasoning tables gave proof to the sufficient students' grasp of clinical reasoning. Conclusion: Albeit not an exhaustive substitute for BST, this online module seems a feasible way to convey clinical reasoning strategies to students.
Introduction: The Corona virus pandemic rendered most live education this spring term impossible. Many classes were converted into e-learning formats. Teaching at the bedside (BST) seemed unfeasible under the circumstances. BST and clinical reasoning as its major outcome is introduced at the beginning of semester 5, henceforth all BST refers to this first presentation. Project outline: To ensure proficiency of current 5th semester students in future BST sessions, the introduction could not be cancelled albeit teaching with patients was. Knowing that the practical learning objectives of bedside teaching cannot be mirrored in online formats, a compensating module to teach the concept of BST and clinical reasoning had to be designed. Summary of work: To facilitate an understanding of the concept of bedside teaching with a focus on clinical reasoning we developed paper cases and a survey in Microsoft Forms following the history and examination path used in live BST with the addendum of clinical reasoning tables. For the first paper case, a personal feedback was provided for the clinical reasoning tables. A sample solution was provided later for self-feedback on the whole case. The first case was completed by 87, the second by 40 of 336 students. Response to individual feedback was positive. Students still missed hands-on training in history taking and examination with patients. Discussion: Paper cases cannot fully substitute BST. However, given the prime directive during the pandemic to protect our patients, this module engaged around one third of the cohort. The review of uploaded clinical reasoning tables gave proof to the sufficient students' grasp of clinical reasoning. Conclusion: Albeit not an exhaustive substitute for BST, this online module seems a feasible way to convey clinical reasoning strategies to students.
Authors: Peter P J L Verkoeijen; Remy M J P Rikers; Henk G Schmidt; Margje W J van de Wiel; Jeroen P Kooman Journal: Med Educ Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 6.251
Authors: Henrik Heitmann; Philipp Wagner; Elisabeth Fischer; Martin Gartmeier; Friederike Schmidt-Graf Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-01-31 Impact factor: 2.463