Team-Based Learning Among Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review

Team-based learning versus traditional teaching effect on pharmacy Students' Performance: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Several pharmacy schools have implemented team-based learning (TBL) in their curriculum worldwide. Yet, TBL's effectiveness compared to traditional teaching in improving students' outcomes in pharmacy education is yet to be assessed collectively. Thus, the aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the performance of pharmacy students following the implementation of team-based learning (TBL) in the pharmacy curriculum as opposed to traditional learning methods.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis included studies that assessed students' performance after TBL was implemented in a pharmacy curriculum. Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, the review conducted searches in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar until July 26, 2023.

Results

A total of 11 studies comparing TBL against traditional teaching methods and assessing students' performance were included. The pooled analysis, involving 2,400 students from 10 studies, demonstrated a mean difference (MD) in favor of TBL (MD = 2.27, 95 % CI [-0.85, 5.40]). However, notable heterogeneity was observed with an I2 value of 82 %, and the observed difference did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusion

TBL exhibited enhanced student performance in pharmacy education compared to traditional teaching, although the difference was not statistically significant. The meta-analysis findings support the use of TBL in pharmacy education for various pharmacy courses (pharmaceutical and clinical sciences courses) and students at different levels. However, there is a need for more robust studies to comprehensively evaluate TBL, considering aspects such as students' performance and engagement, skills development, and satisfaction.

Is team-based learning an alternative approach for UK undergraduate dental education? A scoping review of the literature

Introduction Team-based learning (TBL) is a dialectic, student-focused method of teaching which has become increasingly popular in international institutions for delivering undergraduate dental education. Despite several dental schools in the UK using dialectic teaching methods, such as problem-based learning, none appear to use TBL.Aims This scoping review aims to identify the literature investigating the use of TBL compared with other teaching pedagogies in delivering undergraduate dental education.Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines were adopted. A search strategy was developed using appropriate MeSH (medical subject headings) terms and key words. Medline, Scopus and the Cochrane Databases were searched.Results Overall, five studies were identified for inclusion. Of these, three studies compared TBL to traditional, didactic teaching methods (such as lectures) and found both student satisfaction and student performance to be greater with TBL. The remaining two studies compared TBL to other dialectic methods of teaching. The results on student performance in these studies were conflicting.Conclusions There is some limited but promising evidence that TBL is effective at delivering undergraduate dental education; however, the scarcity of research evidence highlights the need for more robust exploration.

Implementation of Team-Based Learning for a Clinical Module of the Ethiopian Undergraduate Anesthesia Curriculum and Students' Perspectives: A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Team-based learning (TBL) is an active learning strategy that gives students the opportunity to apply conceptual information through a series of tasks that incorporate individual effort, team collaboration, and immediate feedback. This study aimed to report baseline TBL implementation in a clinical module of a fourth-year competency-based undergraduate anesthesia curriculum and explore the perspectives of students.

Methods

In April 2023, 18 students participated in two TBL sessions over two weeks, and readiness assurance test results and post-TBL evaluations were analyzed. Week one TBL implementation scores were compared with week two, establishing a longitudinal analysis over two points in time. Students also participated in an online survey to assess their views on the advantages and design of TBL, their perceptions of its best and worst features, and their suggestions for its implementation.

Results

Of 18 students, 16 (89%) responded to the survey. Most students believed that TBL was an effective educational strategy but expressed concern about the amount of time required for TBL preparation and the need for student readiness. The individual readiness assurance test scores did not differ significantly between weeks 1 and 2 (mean difference [MD] = 0.39, P= 0.519, 95% CI: -0.824 to 1.60). However, the students' median [IQR] team readiness assurance test scores increased significantly from week one to week two, from 8 [2] to 10 [1] (p = 0.004). Peer evaluation scores also showed a significant increase in week 2 (MD = 2.4, P = 0.001, 95% CI: -3.760 to -0.996).

Conclusion

TBL was successfully implemented for a clinical module at Dilla University-Ethiopia for the first time. Students perceived it positively, but some criticized its preparation time, workload, and minimal facilitator engagement. We suggest convenient and flexible scheduling personalized for each student's needs when TBL is applied for clinical modules.

Team-based learning vs. lecture-based learning in nursing: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

Our study aims to identify, appraise, and summarize randomized controlled trials (RCT) on the effectiveness of team-based learning (TBL) versus lecture-based learning (LBL) in nursing students.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Ovid, Embase, Cochrane, CBM, VIP, CNKI, and Wan Fang databases from inception to 22nd July 2022 to enroll RCTs that compared TBL versus LBL. The studies reporting the performance of nursing students receiving TBL pedagogy compared to those receiving traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) were to be analyzed. Scores of academic or nursing abilities were considered the primary outcome, and the results of nursing competencies, students' engagement with, behaviors, attitudes toward, experience, satisfaction, or perceptions of TBL were considered the secondary outcome. This systematic review was conducted following the guidelines of the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

Results

A total of 1,009 participants in 10 RCTs were enrolled in this study. Of the 10 RCTs, eight studies investigated undergraduate students, one involved vocational college students, and one enrolled secondary school students. The most reported outcomes were class engagement survey toward TBL (n = 8); students' ability (n = 5), academic knowledge or performance (n = 4); students' experience (n = 4), satisfaction or perceptions of TBL (n = 4).

Conclusion

This review suggested that the TBL was an effective pedagogy in improving academic performance and general ability in nursing students. High-quality trials are needed, and standardized outcomes should be used.

An innovation on clinical placement for occupational therapy mental health during the COVID-19: A mixed-methods feasibility study

The COVID-19 pandemic altered the health profession's education. Educational activities were shifted to online, and clinical placements were compromised in certain countries. A mixed-methods study included 17 undergraduates undergoing a mental health placement. The first 3 weeks of clinical placement applied online case-based learning in written and in video format. The last 2 weeks involved hybrid remote and physical onsite clinical placement. SPICES model utilizing various active learning activities, case studies and client attendance, facilitator engagement, discussion and feedback were implemented. A self-administered System Usability Scale (SUS), e-learning preference level, focus group discussion, and reflective writing was conducted at the end of each week and the students' final marks were compared with the past cohort who attended conventional physical clinical placement. Two-way mixed ANOVA indicates no significant interaction was found on the SUS (p = 0.062, ηp2 = 0.062) and preference scores (p = 0.285, ηp2 = 0.079) according to week and practical site. There was no significant difference in the final mark among the online and onsite placement of the current cohort (p = 0.350, d = 0.47). The current cohort reported better marks than the previous cohort who attended conventional placement (p = 0.006, d = 0.99). Qualitative findings show positive responses where online activities have minimal restriction on the learning process. This innovative approach is acceptable for substituting conventional clinical learning during this restricted situation.