ABSTRACT
Objective:To explore the application effect of formative assessment combined with Ladder type teaching on the teaching of standardized training of nephropathy and endocrinology.Methods:A total of 39 residents who rotated in the Department of Nephrology and Endocrinology, Sichuan Science City Hospital from March 2019 to March 2020 were included in the control group and were taught routinely, and another 42 residents who rotated from April 2020 to April 2021 were classified as a research group and were given formative assessment and Ladder type teaching. The out-department assessment results between the two groups were compared, and the mini-clinical exercise evaluation (Mini-CEX), normal performance assessment and 360-degree evaluation results of the research group when entering and exiting the department were compared. The students' satisfaction with teaching between the two groups was also compared. SPSS 24.0 was used for t test, chi-square test and rank sum test. Results:The scores of theory, skill manipulation and case analysis in the research group were higher than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05). The Mini-CEX score, usual performance assessment score and 360-degree evaluation score in the research group when exiting the department were all higher than those when entering the department, with statistically significant difference ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the grades distribution of teaching satisfaction degrees between the two groups ( P<0.05), and the total satisfaction rate of the research group was higher than that of the control group. Conclusion:The use of formative assessment combined with Ladder type teaching in the standardized training of nephropathy and endocrinology can significantly improve the scores of the residents and their clinical comprehensive literacy, and increase the satisfaction of teaching, with great value of popularization and application.
ABSTRACT
Objective To analyze the difference and correlation of the evaluation of the medical students' communication ability between the examiners,standardized patients (SP) and medical students themselves in objective structured clinical examination (OSCE),and to provide scientific basis for the appropriate evaluation method of medical students' communication ability.Methods OSCE was used to evaluate the communication ability of 90 medical students in Daping Hospital,Chongqing,and the three parties were evaluated by the examiners,SP and medical students themselves.Excel and SPSS 17.0 statistical analysis software were used,through Friendman M.test,t test and correlation analysis to analyze the differences and correlation of the three parties evaluations.Results The different evaluation between the three parties on the communication ability of medical students was as follows.Examiner's evaluation was the lowest (8.39 ± 1.18),SP's evaluation was the highest (9.62 ± 0.73),Medical students themselves' evaluation was higher (9.28± 1.09);The examiner's evaluation of Medical students' empathy,verbal communication ability,nonverbal communication ability and etiquette was lower (P=0.00).The correlation analysis of the three parties' evaluation showed that there was a significant correlation between the three parties on the connnunication ability,empathy and nonverbal communication ability (P＜0.05).The evaluation of SP and medical students themselves on medical students' language communication ability and etiquette was significantly correlated (P＜0.05).Conclusions Using examiner or SP or medical students themselves only to evaluate the communication ability of medical students is not accurate,The Examiner and SP as the main trial test personnel should collaborate to evaluate medical students' communication ability.The examiner can evaluate three projects such as what is medical ethics and law,empathy,nonverbal communication ability,while the SP can evaluate the two projects:what is language communication ability and etiquette.The collaborative evaluation of the two sides can be more accurate to reflect the doctor-patient communication ability of medical students.