Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Virtual patient tutorials in the undergraduate paediatric curriculum
Gareth Jones1
Stephen Kempley2 Mark Roberts1,2
1Institute of Health Science Education,
Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London
2Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London
@G_Ljones [email protected]
Less clinical time
Broader curriculum with different emphasis
More students on the wards
Less individual opportunities for patient contact
The need to diversify from didactic teaching
Safe environment to practice
Repetition of key clinical topics
Transferable skills
Multiple uses e.g. summative & formative
Control of own learning
Under-utilised
Costly- Time and expertise
Lacking human component
Lack of feedback to and from learners
Students Demanding more
Blended Learning
Virtual patient - Tutorial
Virtual patient design
Method
Linear Branching Personalised- e.g. Name insertion and avatars Common paediatric topics: fever & urinary tract infectionEvidence & guideline basedTailored feedback
Virtual patient design
Method
Tutorial design
Linear Branching Personalised- e.g. Name insertion and avatars Common paediatric topics: fever & urinary tract infectionEvidence & guideline basedTailored feedback
Fourth Year medical students (n=21) prior to placement in
paediatrics
One tutor with knowledge of virtual patients and paediatrics
Interactivity/Tracking using Nearpod tablet App & computer program
Introduction addressing how/when/why Virtual patients are used
Core part of tutorial with students completing Virtual patient
Summary of session with Key learning points
Two parts: Part one via Nearpod (online app)Part two paper questionnaire
Part one: Clinical focusPaediatric history, examination and
guidelinesShort answer questions & single best
answer
Part two:Tutorial/VP focus Likert scale: Satisfaction ratings & free text
Content, feedback, Clinically realistic
Evaluation design
Results
Before AfterStatistical test -
significance
Percentage of history items correctly identified - Mean (SD)
56% (SD 14%)
98% (SD 6%)
Paired Wilcoxon p=0.002
Correct physical examination identified (%) 54% 100% Fishers exact p=0.015Correct guideline identified (%) 8% 85% Fishers exact p=<0.001
Results
Enjoyable
Objectives were met
Actively engaged
Clinical realistic
Clinical evolution
Sufficiently challenging
Adequate feedback
Utility for future learning
0% 10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% strongly agree (composite score)
Free text statements:“We should have more VP sessions for other modules!”“Personally I like to supplement my knowledge with books”“Virtual, so safe!”
DiscussionHigh levels of satisfaction
Increased knowledge
Students able to repeat in their own time
How long was knowledge retained for?
How much IT knowledge does a clinician
have/need
Increased independent student usage of VPs?
Take home messagesVirtual patients in a tutorial setting are acceptable and lead to learning (..at least in the short term).
Clinicians should be encouraged to embrace and utilise technology in teaching.
Utilising virtual patients in more diverse ways may justify the time and expertise committed to their development
Acknowledgements
Dr. Stephen Kempley
Dr. Mark Roberts
Ms. Karin Fernandez
Dr. Charlotte Dinkel
@G_Ljones [email protected]
Icons: FlatIcon.com
Virtual patient tutorials in the undergraduate paediatric curriculum
Gareth Jones1
Stephen Kempley2 Mark Roberts1,2
1Institute of Health Science Education,
Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London
2Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London
@G_Ljones [email protected]
