
浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
中山大学附属第一医院妇产科,广州 510080
周祎,Email:zhouyi6@mail.sysu.edu.cn
网络出版日期:2023-12-26,
收稿日期:2022-10-03,
扫 描 看 全 文
刘婧宇, 赵婧雅, 黄轩, 等. 情景模拟联合Debriefing-GAS方法在产前遗传咨询教学中的应用[J/OL]. 中华医学教育探索杂志, 2023,1-6.
Liu Jingyu, Zhao Jingya, Huang Xuan, et al. Application of situational simulation combined with the debriefing-GAS method in the teaching of prenatal genetic counseling[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research, 2023,1-6.
刘婧宇, 赵婧雅, 黄轩, 等. 情景模拟联合Debriefing-GAS方法在产前遗传咨询教学中的应用[J/OL]. 中华医学教育探索杂志, 2023,1-6. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20221003-01556.
Liu Jingyu, Zhao Jingya, Huang Xuan, et al. Application of situational simulation combined with the debriefing-GAS method in the teaching of prenatal genetic counseling[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research, 2023,1-6. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20221003-01556.
目的
2
探讨情景模拟联合(Debriefing-gather-analyze-summarize,GAS)方法在产前遗传咨询能力教学中的应用效果。
方法
2
选取2021年5月至2022年5月在中山大学附属第一医院进行遗传咨询培训的30名2017至2018级五年制和八年制临床医学专业本科生作为研究对象,采用情景模拟联合Debriefing-GAS方法对学生进行胎儿疾病产前遗传咨询教学。通过教师考核比较教学过程中遗传咨询能力的变化,并通过问卷调查学生对于教学的满意度。采用SPSS 26.0统计软件进行数据分析;采用(均数±标准差)表示正态分布计量资料,
M
(min~max)表示非正态分布计量资料,频数及率表示计数资料;采用配对样本
t
检验比较教学前后考核成绩。
结果
2
经过教学后,学生遗传咨询考核成绩与教学前比较有所提高[(74.5±18.6)分vs.(87.2±14.5)分,
t
=4.10,
P
<
0.001],临床能力[(35.4±9.6)分 vs.(41.1±6.9)分,
t
=3.72,
P
=0.001)]、医患沟通能力[(17.5±4.6)分vs.(20.8±3.8),
t
=4.34,
P
<
0.001]、专业素养[(11.0±2.5)分 vs.(12.5±2.3)分,
t
=2.89,
P
=0.007]、团队合作能力[(3.5±1.0)分vs.(4.2±0.8)分,
t
=3.67,
P
=0.001),以及组织效能[(7.1±2.0)分vs.(8.3±1.7)分,
t
=2.94,
P
=0.006]等综合能力均得到提升,差异有统计学意义。问卷调查结果显示,学生对遗传咨询教学整体实施流程及环节设置合理性[3.0(2.0~4.0)分]
、教学质量[3.5(2.0~4.0)分]、教学能否有效增加学生的学习兴趣及主动性[4.0(3.0~4.0)分]
、提高理论知识水平[4.0(3.0~4.0)分]、遗传咨询沟通技巧的掌握[4.0(2.0~4.0)分]
,以及相关技术研究和应用前景了解[3.0(2.0~4.0)分]的满意度评价等级均在满意之上。但有2名(6.7%)学生认为,此种教学方式并不能高效地达到教学目的,因为教学过程稍显冗长复杂。
结论
2
情景模拟联合Debriefing-GAS方法在产前遗传咨询教学中获得了较好的应用效果,可以帮助本科生掌握产前遗传咨询理论知识,提高其临床综合素养,学生满意度较高,可在临床中推广应用。
Objective
2
To investigate the application effect of situational simulation combined with the debriefing-gather-analyze-summarize (GAS) method in the teaching of prenatal genetic counseling.
Methods
2
A total of 30 medical students of the five- and eight-year programs in the classes of 2017 and 2018 who received genetic counseling training in The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from May 2021 to May 2022 were selected as research subjects
and situational simulation combined with the debriefing-GAS method was used for the teaching of prenatal genetic counseling. Assessment was performed by the teacher to evaluate the change in genetic counseling abilities during the teaching process
and a questionnaire survey was conducted to investigate the degree of satisfaction with teaching among the students. SPSS 26.0 software was used for data analysis; normally distributed continuous data were expressed as mean±standard deviation
non-normally distributed continuous data were expressed as
M(min-max)
and categorical data were expressed as frequency and rate; the paired samples
t
-test was used for comparison of assessment scores before and after teaching.
Results
2
After teaching
there were significant increases in the assessment scores of genetic counseling (74.5±18.6 points vs. 87.2±14.5 points
t
=4.10
P
<
0.001) and comprehensive abilities such as clinical ability (35.4±9.6 points vs. 41.1±6.9 points
t
=3.72
P
=0.001)
doctor-patient communication (17.5±4.6 points vs. 20.8±3.8 points
t
=4.34
P
<
0.001)
professional literacy (11.0±2.5 points vs. 12.5±2.3 points
t
=2.89
P
=0.007)
teamwork (3.5±1.0 points vs. 4.2±0.8 points
t
=3.67
P
=0.001)
and organizational effectiveness (7.1±2.0 points vs. 8.3±1.7 points
t
=2.94
P
=0.006). The questionnaire survey showed that the degree of satisfaction among students was rated above satisfaction for the reasonability of the implementation process and links of genetic counseling teaching [3.0 (2.0-4.0) points]
teaching quality [3.5 (2.0-4.0) points]
whether the teaching model could effectively increase the interest and initiative in learning [4.0 (3.0-4.0) points]
the improvement in theoretical knowledge [4.0 (3.0-4.0) points]
communication skills in genetic counseling [4.0 (2.0-4.0) points]
and the understanding of related techniques and application prospect [3.0 (2.0-4.0) points]
. However
two students (6.7%) thought that this teaching model could not efficiently reach teaching objectives
since the teaching process was slightly complicated.
Conclusion
2
Situational simulation combined with the debriefing-GAS method has achieved a good effect in the teaching of prenatal genetic counseling and can help undergraduates to master the theoretical knowledge of prenatal genetic counseling and improve their comprehensive clinical abilities
with a relatively high degree of satisfaction
and therefore
it holds promise for clinical application.
复盘遗传咨询胎儿医学医学模拟教育教学改革
DebriefingGenetic counselingFetal medicineSimulation-based medical educationTeaching reform
赵晓曦, 武艾宁. 遗传咨询医师培养与医学遗传学教学改革[J]. 中国继续医学教育, 2018, 10(7): 7-9. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9308.2018.07.004http://dx.doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-9308.2018.07.004.
古芳, 吴艳欣, 陈海天. 情景模拟教学在妇产科急症实习培训中的应用[J]. 中国高等医学教育, 2021(10): 98-99. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1701.2021.10.050http://dx.doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-1701.2021.10.050.
周祎, 杨慧霞. 胎儿医学的现状与发展方向[J]. 中华围产医学杂志, 2012, 15(10): 577-579. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-9408.2012.10.001http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-9408.2012.10.001.
杨继青, 王昆华, 张尊月, 等. 以产前遗传咨询为例探讨中国遗传咨询的现状与困境[J]. 中国产前诊断杂志(电子版), 2019, 11(1): 52-56. DOI: 10.13470/j.cnki.cjpd.2019.01.013http://dx.doi.org/10.13470/j.cnki.cjpd.2019.01.013.
段涛. 关注胎儿医学的发展[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2013, 29(8): 601-603.
Freytag J, Stroben F, Hautz WE, et al. Improving patient safety through better teamwork: how effective are different methods of simulation debriefing? Protocol for a pragmatic, prospective and randomised study [J]. BMJ Open, 2017, 7(6): e015977. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015977http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015977.
Kessler DO, Cheng A, Mullan PC. Debriefing in the emergency department after clinical events: a practical guide [J]. Ann Emerg Med, 2015, 65(6): 690-698. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.10.019http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.10.019.
Gardner R. Introduction to debriefing [J]. Semin Perinatol, 2013, 37(3): 166-174. DOI: 10.1053/j.semperi.2013.02.008http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2013.02.008.
Bortolato-Major C, Mantovani MF, Felix JVC, et al. Debriefing evaluation in nursing clinical simulation: a cross-sectional study [J]. Rev Bras Enferm, 2019, 72(3): 788-794. DOI: 10.1590/0034-7167-2018-0103http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167-2018-0103.
杨闻, 李力, 季湘年, 等. 复盘教学方式在临床基本技能教学中的应用[J]. 中华医学教育杂志, 2020, 40(1): 30-33. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-677X.2020.01.008http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-677X.2020.01.008.
邹欣, 林琳, 孙蕾, 等. 复盘式急救演练对护士急救综合能力的影响[J]. 中国医药导报, 2022, 19(1): 193-196.
Roze des Ordons AL, Eppich W, Lockyer J, et al. Guiding, intermediating, facilitating, and teaching (GIFT): a conceptual framework for simulation educator roles in healthcare debriefing [J]. Simul Healthc, 2022, 17(5): 283-292. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000619http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000619.
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