Perception of usefulness of laboratory tests ordering by internal medicine residents in ambulatory setting: A single-center prospective cohort study

Optimizing the data in direct access testing: information technology to support an emerging care model

Direct access testing (DAT) is an emerging care model that provides on-demand laboratory services for certain preventative, diagnostic, and monitoring indications. Unlike conventional testing models where health care providers order tests and where sample collection is performed onsite at the clinic or laboratory, most interactions between DAT consumers and the laboratory are virtual. Tests are ordered and results delivered online, and specimens are frequently self-collected at home with virtual support. Thus, DAT depends on high-quality information technology (IT) tools and optimized data utilization to a greater degree than conventional laboratory testing. This review critically discusses the United States DAT landscape in relation to IT to highlight digital challenges and opportunities for consumers, health care systems, providers, and laboratories. DAT offers consumers increased autonomy over the testing experience, cost, and data sharing, but the current capacity to integrate DAT as a care option into the conventional patient-provider model is lacking and will require innovative approaches to accommodate. Likewise, both consumers and health care providers need transparent information about the quality of DAT laboratories and clinical decision support to optimize appropriate use of DAT as a part of comprehensive care. Interoperability barriers will require intentional approaches to integrating DAT-derived data into the electronic health records of health systems nationally. This includes ensuring the laboratory results are appropriately captured for downstream data analytic pipelines that are used to satisfy population health and research needs. Despite the data- and IT-related challenges for widespread incorporation of DAT into routine health care, DAT has the potential to improve health equity by providing versatile, discreet, and affordable testing options for patients who have been marginalized by the current limitations of health care delivery in the United States.

Gamified versus non-gamified online educational modules for teaching clinical laboratory medicine to first-year medical students at a large allopathic medical school in the United States

BACKGROUND

Medical educators seek innovative ways to engage learners efficiently and effectively. Gamification has been explored as one way to accomplish this feat; however, questions remain about which contexts gamification would be most useful. Time constraints and student interest present major barriers for teaching laboratory medicine to students. This study aims to compare two versions of an interactive online module, one gamified and one not, for teaching laboratory medicine concepts to pre-clinical medical students.

METHODS

First-year medical students reviewed either a gamified or non-gamified version of an interactive online module in preparation for an in-person flipped classroom session on Laboratory Medicine. Learning theory guided the design of the modules and both contained identical content, objectives, and structure. The "gamified" module included the additional elements of personalization, progress meters, points, badges, and story/role play. After reviewing the module, students completed an anonymous knowledge check and optional survey.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-one students completed the post module knowledge check as assigned (82 gamified, 89 non-gamified). Knowledge check scores were higher for the students who reviewed the gamified module (p < 0.02), corresponding to an effect size of 0.4 for the gamified module. Eighty-one students completed optional post-module surveys (46 gamified, 35 non-gamified). Instructional efficiency was calculated using task difficulty questions and knowledge check scores, and the resulting instructional efficiency was higher for the gamified module. There was no significant difference in the student-reported time required to complete the modules. Additionally, both versions of the module were well received and led to positive ratings related to motivation and confidence. Finally, examination of open-ended survey results suggested that the addition of game elements added value to the gamified module and enhanced engagement and enjoyment.

CONCLUSIONS

In this setting, the addition of gamification to an interactive online module enhanced learning outcome, instructional efficiency, student engagement and enjoyment. These results should inspire further exploration of gamification for teaching Laboratory Medicine concepts to pre-clinical medical students.