[Development and validation of a checklist for evaluating videos for learning resuscitation measures]. / Entwicklung und Validierung einer Checkliste zur Bewertung von Videos zum Erlernen von Reanimationsmaßnahmen.

BACKGROUND: Well-performed resuscitation measures can improve the outcome in the event of cardiovascular arrest. Medical students often use teaching videos to learn practical skills. Studies confirmed the often inadequate quality of the videos on resuscitation available on the Internet. An evaluation using a validated checklist based on the current guidelines has so far been lacking. OBJECTIVE: The development and validation of a checklist for evaluating instructional videos on resuscitation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In an expert workshop, checklist items were formulated based on the current guidelines. The checklist was tested by emergency physicians in a 4-step review process. The evaluations were analyzed and the items adjusted and specified if necessary. After the review process was completed, the checklist was applied to 74 videos on the topic of resuscitation. RESULTS: The checklist consists of 25 items in 4 categories (initial measures, chest compression, AED use, breathing), which are rated on a 3-level Likert scale. A total of 16 emergency doctors participated in the study and rated an average of 9.3 ± 5.7 videos each. The reviewers agreed in 65.1 ± 12.6% of the cases. The highest agreement was achieved in the subtopic AED, with the item "do not touch patients in shock" having the highest agreement. The items in the thoracic compression category were most often rated differently. CONCLUSION: For the first time, a checklist for evaluating instructional videos for resuscitation was created and validated for German-speaking countries.

[The surgeon's balancing act-Teaching in the clinical routine]. / Der Chirurg im Spagat ­ Lehre im klinischen Alltag.

BACKGROUND: Thus medical students must be inspired to undertake this specialty. Students complain that the teaching is subordinate to patient care and limited by a lack of time and medical personnel. Although there are many studies assessing student perceptions, few exist that focus on the issues that teachers face. OBJECTIVE: To analyse student teaching in the daily routine and its potential' problems from the surgeon's perspectives. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective study guidelines for semistructured interviews with formulated, open questions were created, which were specified with further questions. All interviews were conducted using these guidelines and recorded. The number of interviews were a function of the concept of content saturation. RESULTS: All 22 participants perceived that the teaching in clinical practice is of paramount importance. Nevertheless, respondents described that learning goals in the clinical routine are not always achieved. The main reason is a lack of time; however, as clinical experience increases other factors will similarly become more important: Consultants and heads of departments complain about deficiencies in students' previous knowledge, including insufficient motivation. Most respondents described that they do not feel appreciated for teaching. Overall, student teaching was perceived as an additional burden but all respondents found the task to be extremely worthwhile. CONCLUSION: In addition to the lack of personnel, a lack of appreciation is the most significant obstacle towards effective teaching. It is therefore important to increase the value of teaching by rewarding good achievements and the creation of effective transparency.

Implementation of written structured feedback into a surgical OSCE.

BACKGROUND: Feedback is an essential element of learning. Despite this, students complain about receiving too little feedback in medical examinations, e.g., in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). This study aims to implement a written structured feedback tool for use in OSCEs and to analyse the attitudes of students and examiners towards this kind of feedback. METHODS: The participants were OSCE examiners and third-year medical students. This prospective study was conducted using a multistage design. In the first step, an unstructured interrogation of the examiners formed the basis for developing a feedback tool, which was evaluated and then adopted in the next steps. RESULTS: In total, 351 students and 51 examiners participated in this study. A baseline was created for each category of OSCE station and was supplemented with station-specific items. Each of these items was rated on a three-point scale. In addition to the preformulated answer options, each domain had space for individual comments. A total of 87.5% of the students and 91.6% of the examiners agreed or rather agreed that written feedback should continue to be used in upcoming OSCEs. CONCLUSION: The implementation of structured, written feedback in a curricular, summative examination is possible, and examiners and students would like the feedback to be constant.