[Technology-enhanced learning in anesthesiology and emergency medicine : A new approach to medical school teaching in the wake of the pandemic]. / "Technology-enhanced learning" in Anästhesiologie und Notfallmedizin : Ein neuer Weg in der studentischen Lehre im Schatten der Pandemie.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has brought about unprecedented challenges to medical schools. Physical distancing as the most effective means of infection prevention renders traditional classroom teaching nearly impossible and new teaching methods are required to contain the infection risk whilst ensuring high-level education. OBJECTIVE: In order to minimize the need for classroom teaching we have created an interactive multimedia eLearning environment using the open-source learning management system "Moodle". This article describes the development of the eLearning environment and aims to establish the acceptance of technology-enhanced learning (TEL) among medical students and the evaluation of TEL as an alternative to classroom teaching. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We have built a multimedia eLearning environment for fourth year medical students covering the medical school curriculum "anesthesiology and emergency medicine", which is based on the recommendations of the German Society for Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI). We have chosen the open-source learning management system "Moodle" as a platform. "Moodle" is widely used by Anglo-American educational institutions to support and conduct academic and nonacademic teaching. In order to assess the students' experience, we have carried out an anonymized post-course survey consisting of multiple-choice and free-answer questions. RESULTS: Of the 157 participants 85.4% rated the course as "very good", 12.1% as "good" and 1.9% as "OK". Lower ratings were not given, 54.8% rated the course content as "very relevant", 43.3% as "relevant" and 1.9% as "neutral", 94.3% felt that more comparable online courses should be offered. The free-text answers revealed that accessibility and multimedia self-controlled learning were highly valued; however, it was felt that hands-on training cannot be replaced by eLearning. CONCLUSION: Technology Enhanced Learning was highly valued by our students and helped to reduce the need for classroom teaching; however, for teaching practical skills classroom teaching remains indispensable.

Is routine replacement of i.v. administration sets required after each change of intermittently administrated antibiotic infusions?

AIM: Manufacturers' instructions recommend changing the infusion line together with the infusion bottle after each administration. We investigated if the complete infusion line may be microbiologically contaminated after short-time antibiotic and rinse-solution application. METHOD: Immediately after the change of an infusion administration set after 72 hours the remaining antibiotic solution was inactivated with yolk and cultured on blood agar for 48 hours at 36°C to detect possible contaminants. RESULTS: Among 87 investigated samples no microbial growth was detected. One sample which hadn't any contact to antibiotics yielded 1 colony forming unit (cfu) of coagulase-negative staphylococci. These results suggest that in case of consecutive antibiotic-short- and rinse-infusions the infusion line may be in place up to 72 hours without contamination. This, however, may be only the case for infusion sets, which are in contact with antibiotics. If no antibiotic is administered, the infusion bottle and the infusion line must be renewed together for every change. To clarify this question into more detail, a larger consecutive study is required. CONCLUSION: I.v. administration sets without any contact to antibiotics must be changed together with their infusion bottle after administration. In case of consecutive antibiotic-short- and rinse-infusions our pilot study suggests using the i.v. administration sets for up to 72 hours without renewing it at every infusion-set exchange.