...
首页> 外文期刊>Western Journal of Emergency Medicine >Randomized Evaluation of Videoconference Meetings for Medical Students’ Mid-clerkship Feedback Sessions
【24h】

Randomized Evaluation of Videoconference Meetings for Medical Students’ Mid-clerkship Feedback Sessions

机译:医务人员中途反馈会议电视会议的随机评估

获取原文

摘要

Introduction: Videoconferencing has been employed in numerous medical education settings ranging from remote supervision of medical trainees to conducting residency interviews. However, no studies have yet documented the utility of and student response to videoconference meetings for mid-clerkship feedback (MCF) sessions required by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME).Methods: From March 2017 to June 2018, third-year medical students rotating through the mandatory, four-week emergency medicine (EM) clerkship at a single medical school were randomly assigned either to a web-based videoconference meeting via Google Hangouts, or to a traditional in-person meeting for their MCF session. To compare students’ MCF experiences we sent out an electronic survey afterward to assess the following using a 0-100 sliding scale: overall satisfaction with the meeting; the effectiveness of communication; the helpfulness of the meeting; their stress levels, and the convenience of their meeting location. The survey also collected data on these demographic variables: the name of the faculty member with whom the student met; student gender, age, and interest in EM; location prior to meeting; meeting-method preference; and number of EM shifts completed.Results: During the study period, 133 third-year medical students responded to the survey. When comparing survey responses between individuals who met online and in person, we did not detect a difference in demographics with the exception of preferred meeting method (p=0.0225). We found no significant differences in the overall experience, helpfulness of the meeting, or stress levels of the meeting between those who met via videoconference vs. in-person (p=0.9909; p=0.8420; p=0.2352, respectively). However, individuals who met in-person with a faculty member rated effectiveness of communication higher than those who met via videoconference (p=0.0002), while those who met online rated convenience higher than those who met in-person (p0.0001). Both effects remained significant after controlling for preferred meeting method (p0.0001 and p=0.0003, respectively) and among EM-bound students (p=.0423 and p0.0110, respectively).Conclusion: Our results suggest that LCME-required MCF sessions can be successfully conducted via web-based programs such as Google Hangouts without jeopardizing overall meeting experience. While the convenience of the meetings was improved, it is also important for clerkship directors to note the perceived deficit in the effectiveness of communication with videoconferencing.
机译:简介:视频会议已被用于许多医学教育环境中,从对医学培训生的远程监督到进行居住面试。然而,尚无研究记录医学联络委员会(LCME)要求的中级职务反馈(MCF)会议视频会议的效用和学生对方法的反应。方法:2017年3月至2018年6月,医学三年级在一所医学院中轮流经过为期四周的强制性急诊医学(EM)职务的学生被随机分配到通过Google Hangouts进行的基于网络的视频会议,或传统的面对面会议以进行MCF会议。为了比较学生的MCF体验,我们随后发送了电子问卷,以0-100的比例进行以下评估:会议的总体满意度;沟通的有效性;会议的帮助;他们的压力水平以及会议地点的便利性。调查还收集了有关这些人口统计学变量的数据:与学生会面的教职员工的姓名;学生的性别,年龄和对EM的兴趣;会议之前的位置;会议方法偏好;结果:在研究期间,有133名三年级医学生对调查做出了回应。在比较在线和亲自见面的个人之间的调查回答时,我们没有发现人口统计学上的差异,除了首选会议方法(p = 0.0225)。我们发现通过视频会议与面对面见面的人在总体体验,会议的帮助或会议压力水平上均无显着差异(分别为p = 0.9909; p = 0.8420; p = 0.2352)。但是,与教职工面对面交流的人认为交流的有效性高于通过视频会议与会人员(p = 0.0002),而在网上见识的人对交流的便利性高于与面对面的人(p <0.0001)。在控制了首选会议方法(分别为p <0.0001和p = 0.0003)和EM受限学生中(分别为p = .0423和p <0.0110)后,这两种效果仍然显着。结论:我们的结果表明,LCME要求的MCF会议可以通过基于网络的程序(例如Google Hangouts)成功进行,而不会损害整体会议体验。虽然会议的便利性得到了改善,但对于业务主管来说,注意视频会议通信的有效性方面的不足也很重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号