
浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
1.中国医学科学院北京协和医院骨科,北京 100730
2.中国医学科学院北京协和医院麻醉科,北京 100730
3.西北工业大学机电学院,西安 100124
4.中国医学科学院北京协和医院教育处,北京 100730
5.中国医学科学院北京协和医学院,北京 100730
张勤,Email:zhangqinpumc@hotmail.com
纸质出版日期:2023-04-20,
收稿日期:2022-03-05,
扫 描 看 全 文
庄乾宇, 惠尚懿, 李欣培, 等. “立体整合、医患共教、模拟实操”教学模式在脊柱外科教学中的应用[J]. 中华医学教育探索杂志, 2023, 22(4): 568-572.
Zhuang Qianyu, Hui Shangyi, Li Xinpei, et al. Study on the application effects of the mode of "Multidisciplinary integration, Doctors & patients co-teaching, Simulated practice" in the teaching of spinal surgery[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research, 2023,22(4):568-572.
庄乾宇, 惠尚懿, 李欣培, 等. “立体整合、医患共教、模拟实操”教学模式在脊柱外科教学中的应用[J]. 中华医学教育探索杂志, 2023, 22(4): 568-572. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20220305-01249.
Zhuang Qianyu, Hui Shangyi, Li Xinpei, et al. Study on the application effects of the mode of "Multidisciplinary integration, Doctors & patients co-teaching, Simulated practice" in the teaching of spinal surgery[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research, 2023,22(4):568-572. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20220305-01249.
目的
2
探讨“立体整合、医患共教、模拟实操”教学模式在脊柱外科教学中的应用及效果。
方法
2
选取2021年在北京协和医院外科实习的临床医学八年制学生64名作为研究对象。按照随机数字表法将其分为试验组(33名)与对照组(31名),试验组采用“立体整合、医患共教、模拟实操”的新教学模式,对照组采用常规教学方案。教学效果评价指标包括理论测试、解剖结构辨识测试及问卷调查分析。应用SPSS 22.0软件进行配对
t
检验及两独立样本
t
检验。
结果
2
试验组授课后理论测试成绩(51.25±6.99)分及解剖结构辨识成绩(37.56±1.83)分均高于对照组(42.46±6.13)分和(30.37±3.46)分,差异有统计学意义(
P
<
0.001)。调查问卷有效回收率100%,问卷结果显示:试验组在教学吸引力、课堂专注度、学习兴趣、学习效率、解剖辨识能力、发现解决问题能力及总体教学方式满意度方面均高于对照组(
P
<
0.05)。
结论
2
“立体整合、医患共教、模拟实操”教学模式可有效提高学生理论知识、学习兴趣、学习效率、实践操作和发现解决问题的能力,值得推广。
Objective
2
To explore the application effects of the mode of "Multidisciplinary integration
Doctors & patients co-teaching
Simulated practice" in the teaching of spinal surgery.
Methods
2
A total of 64 eight-year program clinical medical students who practiced in Peking Union Medical College Hospital in 2021 were taken as research objects and randomly divided into experimental group (
n
=33) and control group (
n
=31). The experimental group received the new teaching mode of "Multidisciplinary integration
Doctors
&
patients co-teaching
Simulated practice"
and the control group received regular teaching mode. At the end of teaching
the teaching effects were evaluated from several aspects
including the scores of theoretical examinations
anatomical marks identification tests
and anonymous questionnaires. SPSS 22.0 software was used for paired
t
-test and two independent-samples
t
-test.
Results
2
The theoretical test scores [(51.25±6.99) points] and anatomical structure identification scores [(37.56±1.83) points]
of the experimental group were higher than those of the control group [(42.46±6.13) points and (30.37±3.46) points]
and the differences were statistically significant (
P
<
0.001). The effective recovery rate of the questionnaire was 100%. The results of the questionnaire showed that the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group in terms of teaching attractiveness
attention
learning interest
learning efficiency
anatomical identification ability
problem-finding and problem-solving ability and overall teaching method satisfaction (
P
<
0.05).
Conclusion
2
The teaching mode of "Multidisciplinary integration
Doctors & patients co-teaching
Simulated practice" can effectively improve students' theoretical knowledge
learning interest
learning efficiency
operation proficiency and problem-finding and problem-solving ability
which is worth promoting.
立体整合医患共教3D打印教学模型脊柱外科临床教学
Multidisciplinary integrationDoctors & patients co-teaching3D printingTeaching modeSpine surgeryClinical teaching
González Blum C, Richter R, Fuchs R, et al. An interprofessional teaching approach for medical and physical therapy students to learn functional anatomy and clinical examination of the lower spine and hip [J]. Ann Anat, 2020, 231: 151534. DOI: 10.1016/j.aanat.2020.151534http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2020.151534.
Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 96 [J]. Med Teach, 2015, 37(4): 312-322. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998.
Pham MH, Jakoi AM, Wali AR, et al. Trends in spine surgery training during neurological and orthopaedic surgery residency: a 10-year analysis of ACGME case log data [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2019, 101(22): e122. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.19.00466http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.00466.
Chen R, Rodrigues Armijo P, Krause C, et al. A comprehensive review of robotic surgery curriculum and training for residents, fellows, and postgraduate surgical education [J]. Surg Endosc, 2020, 34(1): 361-367. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06775-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06775-1.
Hedman L, Fahlstedt M, Schlickum M, et al. A pilot evaluation of an educational program that offers visualizations of cervical spine injuries: medical students' self-efficacy increases by training [J]. Inform Health Soc Care, 2014, 39(1): 33-46. DOI: 10.3109/17538157.2013.834343http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17538157.2013.834343.
Bohl MA, McBryan S, Pais D, et al. The living spine model: a biomimetic surgical training and education tool [J]. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown), 2020, 19(1): 98-106. DOI: 10.1093/ons/opz326http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ons/opz326.
Korownyk CS, Allan GM, McCormack J, et al. Successes, lessons and opportunities: 15-year follow-up of an integrated evidence-based medicine curriculum [J]. BMJ Evid Based Med, 2021, 26(5): 241-245. DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111393http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111393.
Mawdsley A, Willis S. Exploring an integrated curriculum in pharmacy: students' perspectives on the experienced curriculum and pedagogies supporting integrative learning [J]. Curr Pharm Teach Learn, 2019, 11(5): 450-460. DOI: 10.1016/j.cptl.2019.02.006http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.02.006.
Wong E, Nguyen TV. Introduction of an integrated curriculum: early outcomes and experiences within a large private university [J]. Curr Pharm Teach Learn, 2019, 11(5): 528-532. DOI: 10.1016/j.cptl.2019.02.015http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.02.015.
Rowland P, MacKinnon KR, McNaughton N. Patient involvement in medical education: to what problem is engagement the solution? [J]. Med Educ, 2021, 55(1): 37-44. DOI: 10.1111/medu.14200http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/medu.14200.
Dijk SW, Duijzer EJ, Wienold M. Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review [J]. BMJ Open, 2020, 10(7): e037217. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037217http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037217.
Rockey NG, Ramos GP, Romanski S, et al. Patient participation in medical student teaching: a survey of hospital patients [J]. BMC Med Educ, 2020, 20(1): 142. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02052-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02052-1.
Towle A, Brown H, Hofley C, et al. The expert patient as teacher: an interprofessional Health Mentors programme [J]. Clin Teach, 2014, 11(4): 301-306. DOI: 10.1111/tct.12222http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tct.12222.
Daniels AH, Ames CP, Smith JS, et al. Variability in spine surgery procedures performed during orthopaedic and neurological surgery residency training: an analysis of ACGME case log data [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2014, 96(23): e196. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.M.01562http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.M.01562.
Stefan P, Pfandler M, Lazarovici M, et al. Three-dimensional-printed computed tomography-based bone models for spine surgery simulation [J]. Simul Healthc, 2020, 15(1): 61-66. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000417http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000417.
0
浏览量
0
下载量
0
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010802024621