An Introduction to the Inverted/Flipped Classroom Model in Education and Advanced Training in Medicine and in the Healthcare Professions.

In describing the inverted classroom model (ICM), the following paper is meant to provide an introduction to the subject matter and to serve as a practical guide for those wishing to employ its methods in basic and advanced medical training and education. The ICM is a blended-learning method in which a self-directed learning phase (individual phase) precedes the classroom-instruction phase. During the online phase, factual knowledge is imparted that serves as a basis for the classroom phase. The classroom phase should subsequently be used to assimilate and implement the previously gained knowledge. In contrast, traditional course concepts impart factual knowledge in lectures, for example, or in other face-to-face teaching formats and are followed by the students' self-instruction in order to assimilate this knowledge. The goal of the ICM is the shift from passive learning to accelerated learning in order to foster learning at cognitively demanding levels such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The concurrent increase in production and use of screencasts and educational videos, the Open Educational Resources "movement" and the widespread use of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCS) have contributed to the increased dissemination of the inverted-classroom method. The intention of the present paper is to provide an introduction to the subject matter and simultaneously to offer a short overview of important projects and research results in the field of medical education and other health professions. Furthermore, an outline is given of the advantages and disadvantages of the model as well as its potential benefit to the future of medical education and training.

Effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention on falls in nursing home residents.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of a multifaceted, nonpharmaceutical intervention on incidence of falls and fallers. DESIGN: Prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled 12-month trial. SETTING: Six community nursing homes in Germany. PARTICIPANTS: Long-stay residents (n = 981) aged 60 and older; mean age 85; 79% female. INTERVENTIONS: Staff and resident education on fall prevention, advice on environmental adaptations, progressive balance and resistance training, and hip protectors. MEASUREMENTS: Falls, fallers, and fractures. RESULTS: The incidence density rate of falls per 1,000 resident years (RY) was 2,558 for the control group (CG) and 1,399 for the intervention group (IG) (relative risk (RR) = 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.41-0.73). Two hundred forty-seven (52.3%) fallers were detected in the CG and 188 (36.9%) in the IG (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.57-0.98). The incidence density rate of frequent fallers (>2/year) was 115 (24.4%) for the CG and 66 (13.0%) for the IG (RR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.35-0.89). The incidence density rate of hip fractures per 1,000 RY was 39 for the CG and 43 for the IG (RR = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.49-2.51). Other fractures were diagnosed with an incidence density rate of 52 per 1,000 RY for CG and 41 per 1,000 RY for IG (RR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.57-1.07). CONCLUSION: The incidence density rate of falls and fallers differed considerably between the control and intervention groups. The study was underpowered to demonstrate a significant difference of hip or nonhip fractures. Because of a low fracture rate in both groups, the investigation of fracture rates would have required a larger sample size to detect an effect of the intervention.