Does the authenticity of preclinical teaching format affect subsequent clinical clerkship outcomes? A prospective randomized crossover trial

Authentic learning in healthcare education: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The increasing complexity of the clinical environment demands a higher level of clinical performance competency. New pedagogical authentic learning methods have been developed to meet this need by bridging the gap between knowledge and practice.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to examine authentic learning methods and their effects in healthcare education.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Data were obtained from a literature search of Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Korean databases (e.g., KoreaMed) for studies published until May 2021. This review selected research papers documenting RCTs or quasi-experimental studies targeting undergraduate students training to become healthcare professionals.

REVIEW METHODS

This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline. The risk of bias assessment utilized the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical checklist.

RESULTS

Of 20 selected studies, 12 studies were randomized controlled trials, while 8 had quasi-experimental designs with a control group. Simulation was identified as an effective educational method for authentic learning. Through authentic learning, undergraduate students cultivated their knowledge and learning motivation. However, divergent conclusions were shown for performance skills.

CONCLUSIONS

Authentic pedagogical methodologies effectively enhanced learners' competencies in the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains. Integrating technological applications, e.g., e-learning or web-based approaches, facilitated education across academic boundaries. Further studies on combining technology with authentic learning approaches should be conducted to construct realistic educational environments for learners.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42021229350.

A Multi-Modal Remote Clinical Skills Mini-Course Utilizing a Teaching TeleOSCE

In the setting of the coronavirus pandemic, medical schools across the world transitioned to a remote learning curriculum with the challenge of developing innovative methods to teach clinical skills. During the pandemic, we designed a 2-week remote clinical skills mini-course for third year medical students. The focus was on clinical reasoning, counseling, and the following the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Core Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs): 1 (history and physical exam), 2 (prioritize a differential diagnosis), 3 (recommend and interpret diagnostic tests), and 5 (document a clinical encounter). A multi-modal approach included large and small group virtual case-based discussions, a teaching TeleOSCE (Objective Structured Clinical Examination), and feedback on patient note skills. Students were asked to self-assess their skills before and after the course based on the core EPAs, counseling skills, and overall preparedness for United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 2 Clinical Skills exam. Students demonstrated statistically significant increases in mean self-rated scores in all areas except interpreting results of basic studies. They found the teaching TeleOSCE and feedback on their notes the most useful. Future curricula will consider integration of peer-peer remote OSCE practice sessions as well as faculty feedback for individualized learning plans. Lessons learned will be useful for remote structured clinical skills courses in the setting of the pandemic.

Bridging the Gap Between the Classroom and the Clerkship: A Clinical Reasoning Curriculum for Third-Year Medical Students

INTRODUCTION

Clinical reasoning is the complex cognitive process that drives the diagnosis of disease and treatment of patients. There is a national call for medical educators to develop clinical reasoning curricula in undergraduate medical education. To address this need, we developed a longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum for internal medicine clerkship students.

METHODS

We delivered six 1-hour sessions to approximately 40 students over the 15-week combined medicine-surgery clerkship at Penn State College of Medicine. We developed the content using previous work in clinical reasoning, including the American College of Physicians' Teaching Medicine Series book Teaching Clinical Reasoning. Students applied a clinical reasoning diagnostic framework to written cases during each workshop. Each session followed a scaffold approach and built upon previously learned clinical reasoning skills. We administered a pre- and postsurvey to assess students' baseline knowledge of clinical reasoning concepts and perceived confidence in performing clinical reasoning skills. Students also provided open-ended responses regarding the effectiveness of the curriculum.

RESULTS

The curriculum was well received by students and led to increased perceived knowledge of clinical reasoning concepts and increased confidence in applying clinical reasoning skills. Students commented on the usefulness of practicing clinical reasoning in a controlled environment while utilizing a framework that could be deliberately applied to patient care.

DISCUSSION

The longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum was effective in reinforcing key concepts of clinical reasoning and allowed for deliberate practice in a controlled environment. The curriculum is generalizable to students in both the preclinical and clinical years.

An experimental study on the effects of a simulation game on students' clinical cognitive skills and motivation

Simulation games are becoming increasingly popular in education, but more insight in their critical design features is needed. This study investigated the effects of fidelity of open patient cases in adjunct to an instructional e-module on students' cognitive skills and motivation. We set up a three-group randomized post-test-only design: a control group working on an e-module; a cases group, combining the e-module with low-fidelity text-based patient cases, and a game group, combining the e-module with a high-fidelity simulation game with the same cases. Participants completed questionnaires on cognitive load and motivation. After a 4-week study period, blinded assessors rated students' cognitive emergency care skills in two mannequin-based scenarios. In total 61 students participated and were assessed; 16 control group students, 20 cases students and 25 game students. Learning time was 2 h longer for the cases and game groups than for the control group. Acquired cognitive skills did not differ between groups. The game group experienced higher intrinsic and germane cognitive load than the cases group (p = 0.03 and 0.01) and felt more engaged (p < 0.001). Students did not profit from working on open cases (in adjunct to an e-module), which nonetheless challenged them to study longer. The e-module appeared to be very effective, while the high-fidelity game, although engaging, probably distracted students and impeded learning. Medical educators designing motivating and effective skills training for novices should align case complexity and fidelity with students' proficiency level. The relation between case-fidelity, motivation and skills development is an important field for further study.

Cause and Effect: Testing a Mechanism and Method for the Cognitive Integration of Basic Science

BACKGROUND

Methods of integrating basic science with clinical knowledge are still debated in medical training. One possibility is increasing the spatial and temporal proximity of clinical content to basic science. An alternative model argues that teaching must purposefully expose relationships between the domains. The authors compared different methods of integrating basic science: causal explanations linking basic science to clinical features, presenting both domains separately but in proximity, and simply presenting clinical features

METHOD

First-year undergraduate health professions students were randomized to four conditions: (1) science-causal explanations (SC), (2) basic science before clinical concepts (BC), (3) clinical concepts before basic science (CB), and (4) clinical features list only (FL). Based on assigned conditions, participants were given explanations for four disorders in neurology or rheumatology followed by a memory quiz and diagnostic test consisting of 12 cases which were repeated after one week.

RESULTS

Ninety-four participants completed the study. No difference was found on memory test performance, but on the diagnostic test, a condition by time interaction was found (F[3,88] = 3.05, P < .03, ηp = 0.10). Although all groups had similar immediate performance, the SC group had a minimal decrease in performance on delayed testing; the CB and FL groups had the greatest decreases.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that creating proximity between basic science and clinical concepts may not guarantee cognitive integration. Although cause-and-effect explanations may not be possible for all domains, making explicit and specific connections between domains will likely facilitate the benefits of integration for learners.

Novel Examination for Evaluating Medical Student Clinical Reasoning: Reliability and Association With Patients Seen

Background: Medical students learn clinical reasoning, in part, through patient care. Although the numbers of patients seen is associated with knowledge examination scores, studies have not demonstrated an association between patient problems and an assessment of clinical reasoning. Aim: To examine the reliability of a clinical reasoning examination and investigate whether there was association between internal medicine core clerkship students' performance on this examination and the number of patients they saw with matching problems during their internal medicine clerkship. Methods: Students on the core internal medicine clerkship at the Uniformed Services University students log 11 core patient problems based on the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine curriculum. On a final clerkship examination (Multistep), students watch a scripted video encounter between physician and patient actors that assesses three sequential steps in clinical reasoning: Step One focuses on history and physical examination; Step Two, students write a problem list after viewing additional clinical findings; Step Three, students complete a prioritized differential diagnosis and treatment plan. Each Multistep examination has three different cases. For graduating classes 2010–2012 (n = 497), we matched the number of patients seen with the problem most represented by the Multistep cases (epigastric pain, generalized edema, monoarticular arthritis, angina, syncope, pleuritic chest pain). We report two-way Pearson correlations between the number of patients students reported with similar problems and the student's percent score on: Step One, Step Two, Step Three, and Overall Test. Results: Multistep reliability: Step 1, 0.6 to 0.8; Step 2, 0.41 to 0.65; Step 3, 0.53 to 0.78; Overall examination (3 cases): 0.74 to 0.83. For three problems, the number of patients seen had small to modest correlations with the Multistep Examination of Analytic Ability total score (r = 0.27 for pleuritic pain, p &lt; 0.05, n = 81 patients; r = 0.14 for epigastric pain, p &lt; 0.05, n = 324 patients; r = 0.19 for generalized edema, p &lt; 0.05, n = 118 patients). Discussion or Conclusion: Although a reliable assessment, student performance on a clinical reasoning examination was weakly associated with the numbers of patients seen with similar problems. This may be as a result of transfer of knowledge between clinical and examination settings, the complexity of clinical reasoning, or the limits of reliability with patient logs and the Multistep.

The Long-Term Career Outcome Study: Lessons Learned and Implications for Educational Practice

The work of the Long-Term Career Outcome Study has been a program of scholarship spanning 10 years. Borrowing from established quality assurance literature, the Long-Term Career Outcome Study team has organized its scholarship into three phases; before medical school, during medical school, and after medical school. The purpose of this commentary is to address two fundamental questions: (1) what has been learned? and (2) how does this knowledge translate to educational practice and policy now and into the future? We believe that answers to these questions are relevant not only to our institution but also to other educational institutions seeking to provide high-quality health professions education.

Evaluating the impact of high- and low-fidelity instruction in the development of auscultation skills

CONTEXT

A principal justification for the use of high-fidelity (HF) simulation is that, because it is closer to reality, students will be more motivated to learn and, consequently, will be better able to transfer their learning to real patients. However, the increased authenticity is accompanied by greater complexity, which may reduce learning, and variability in the presentation of a condition on an HF simulator is typically restricted.

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to explore the effectiveness of HF and low-fidelity (LF) simulation for learning within the clinical education and practice domains of cardiac and respiratory auscultation and physical assessment skills.

METHODS

Senior-level nursing students were randomised to HF and LF instruction groups or to a control group. Primary outcome measures included LF (digital sounds on a computer) and HF (human patient simulator) auscultation tests of cardiac and respiratory sounds, as well as observer-rated performances in simulated clinical scenarios.

RESULTS

On the LF auscultation test, the LF group consistently demonstrated performance comparable or superior to that of the HF group, and both were superior to the performance of the control group. For both HF outcome measures, there was no significant difference in performance between the HF and LF instruction groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study suggest that highly contextualised learning environments may not be uniformly advantageous for instruction and may lead to ineffective learning by increasing extraneous cognitive load in novice learners.

What are the benefits of early patient contact?--A comparison of three preclinical patient contact settings

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing attention to providing preclinical medical students with early patient experiences, little is known about associated outcomes for students. The authors compared three early patient experiences at a large American medical school where all preclinical students complete preceptorships and weekly bedside clinical-skills training and about half complete clinical, community-based summer immersion experiences. The authors asked, what are the relative outcomes and important educational components for students?

METHODS

Medical students completed surveys at end of second year 2009-2011. In 2009, students compared/contrasted two of three approaches; responses framed later survey questions. In 2010 and 2011, students rated all three experiences in relevant areas (e.g., developing comfort in clinical setting). Investigators performed qualitative and quantitative analyses.

RESULTS

Students rated bedside training more highly for developing comfort with clinical settings, one-on-one clinical-skills training, feedback, active clinical experience, quality of clinical training, and learning to be part of a team. They rated community clinical immersion and preceptorships more highly for understanding the life/practice of a physician and career/specialty decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Preclinical students received different benefits from the different experiences. Medical schools should define objectives of early clinical experiences and offer options accordingly. A combination of experiences may help students achieve clinical and team comfort, clinical skills, an understanding of physicians' lives/practices, and broad exposure for career decisions.

Biomedical knowledge, clinical cognition and diagnostic justification: a structural equation model

CONTEXT

The process whereby medical students employ integrated analytic and non-analytic diagnostic strategies is not fully understood. Analysing academic performance data could provide a perspective complementary to that of laboratory experiments when investigating the nature of diagnostic strategy. This study examined the performance data of medical students in an integrated curriculum to determine the relative contributions of biomedical knowledge and clinical pattern recognition to diagnostic strategy.

METHODS

Structural equation modelling was used to examine the relationship between biomedical knowledge and clinical cognition (clinical information gathering and interpretation) assessed in Years 1 and 2 of medical school and their relative contributions to diagnostic justification assessed at the beginning of Year 4. Modelling was applied to the academic performance data of 133 medical students who received their md degrees in 2011 and 2012.

RESULTS

The model satisfactorily fit the data. The correlation between biomedical knowledge and clinical cognition was low-moderate (0.26). The paths between these two constructs and diagnostic justification were moderate and slightly favoured biomedical knowledge (0.47 and 0.40 for biomedical knowledge and clinical cognition, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that within the first 2 years of medical school, students possessed separate, but complementary, cognitive tools, comprising biomedical knowledge and clinical pattern recognition, which contributed to an integrated diagnostic strategy at the beginning of Year 4. Assessing diagnostic justification, which requires students to make their thinking explicit, may promote the integration of analytic and non-analytic processing into diagnostic strategy.

The impact of selected contextual factors on experts' clinical reasoning performance (does context impact clinical reasoning performance in experts?)

Context specificity, or the variation in a participant's performance from one case, or situation, to the next, is a recognized problem in medical education. However, studies have not explored the potential reasons for context specificity in experts using the lens of situated cognition and cognitive load theories (CLT). Using these theories, we explored the influence of selected contextual factors on clinical reasoning performance in internal medicine experts. We constructed and validated a series of videotapes portraying different chief complaints for three common diagnoses seen in internal medicine. Using the situated cognition framework, we modified selected contextual factors--patient, encounter, and/or physician--in each videotape. Following each videotape, participants completed a post-encounter form (PEF) and a think-aloud protocol. A survey estimating recent exposure from their practice to the correct videotape diagnoses was also completed. The time given to complete the PEF was randomly varied with each videotape. Qualitative utterances from the think-aloud procedure were converted to numeric measures of cognitive load. Survey and cognitive load measures were correlated with PEF performance. Pearson correlations were used to assess relations between the independent variables (cognitive load, survey of experience, contextual factors modified) and PEF performance. To further explore context specificity, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to assess differences in PEF scores, by diagnosis, after controlling for time. Low correlations between PEF sections, both across diagnoses and within each diagnosis, were observed (r values ranged from -.63 to .60). Limiting the time to complete the PEF impacted PEF performance (r = .2 to .4). Context specificity was further substantiated by demonstrating significant differences on most PEF section scores with a diagnosis (ANCOVA). Cognitive load measures were negatively correlated with PEF scores. The presence of selected contextual factors appeared to influence diagnostic more than therapeutic reasoning (r = -.2 to -.38). Contextual factors appear to impact expert physician performance. The impact observed is consistent with situated cognition and CLT's predictions. These findings have potential implications for educational theory and clinical practice.