An educational model to teach at the bedside: A qualitative exploratory descriptive study

N. Yamani, Mozhdeh Delzendeh, Peyman Adibi, Amin Beigzadeh
{"title":"An educational model to teach at the bedside: A qualitative exploratory descriptive study","authors":"N. Yamani, Mozhdeh Delzendeh, Peyman Adibi, Amin Beigzadeh","doi":"10.34172/rdme.2023.33143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Teaching medical students at the bedside to foster a spectrum of essential skills can only be acquired if an educational method is utilized in rounding practices regularly. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the best model for conducting bedside rounds from the perspectives of medical teachers and students in our context. Methods: This qualitative exploratory descriptive study, using interviews and observations, was conducted at the Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Iran in 2020. We recruited skilled bedside teachers/role models (n=6) and medical students (n=8) based on snowball and purposive sampling techniques. Data were collected through (A) semi-structured individual interviews and (B) observation of clinical rounds. We used deductive content analysis to analyze data using MAXQDA software version 12. The trustworthiness of the data was evaluated based on four criteria: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Results: In total, this study involved 14 participants, which included 6 bedside role models and 8 medical students. The mean age of medical teachers and medical students was 50 and 29.6 years, respectively. The mean duration of the interviews for medical teachers, medical students, interns, and residents was 20, 25, 30, and 20 minutes, respectively. The findings revealed three cycles and twelve phases that contribute to the development of the optimal bedside teaching model. These include the preparation cycle (comprising preparation, planning, and orientation), the clinical exposure cycle (which involves introduction, interaction, instruction, reinforcement, supervision, and summarization), and the conclusion cycle (consisting of debriefing, feedback, and reflection). Conclusion: An educational model can better facilitate the acquisition of the entire range of clinical skills and professional behaviors, which are indispensable components of learning. The experiences obtained from batches of participants in our context have been instrumental in developing an essential model that fosters both tangible and intangible skills, thereby producing competent doctors.","PeriodicalId":21087,"journal":{"name":"Research and Development in Medical Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Development in Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/rdme.2023.33143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Teaching medical students at the bedside to foster a spectrum of essential skills can only be acquired if an educational method is utilized in rounding practices regularly. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the best model for conducting bedside rounds from the perspectives of medical teachers and students in our context. Methods: This qualitative exploratory descriptive study, using interviews and observations, was conducted at the Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Iran in 2020. We recruited skilled bedside teachers/role models (n=6) and medical students (n=8) based on snowball and purposive sampling techniques. Data were collected through (A) semi-structured individual interviews and (B) observation of clinical rounds. We used deductive content analysis to analyze data using MAXQDA software version 12. The trustworthiness of the data was evaluated based on four criteria: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Results: In total, this study involved 14 participants, which included 6 bedside role models and 8 medical students. The mean age of medical teachers and medical students was 50 and 29.6 years, respectively. The mean duration of the interviews for medical teachers, medical students, interns, and residents was 20, 25, 30, and 20 minutes, respectively. The findings revealed three cycles and twelve phases that contribute to the development of the optimal bedside teaching model. These include the preparation cycle (comprising preparation, planning, and orientation), the clinical exposure cycle (which involves introduction, interaction, instruction, reinforcement, supervision, and summarization), and the conclusion cycle (consisting of debriefing, feedback, and reflection). Conclusion: An educational model can better facilitate the acquisition of the entire range of clinical skills and professional behaviors, which are indispensable components of learning. The experiences obtained from batches of participants in our context have been instrumental in developing an essential model that fosters both tangible and intangible skills, thereby producing competent doctors.
床边教学的教育模式:定性探索性描述研究
背景:只有在查房实践中定期使用一种教育方法,才能让医学生在床边掌握各种基本技能。因此,本研究旨在从医学教师和学生的角度出发,确定在我国开展床旁查房的最佳模式。研究方法这项定性探索性描述研究于 2020 年在伊朗克尔曼医科大学进行,采用访谈和观察法。我们采用滚雪球和目的性抽样技术,招募了熟练的床边教师/角色模型(n=6)和医学生(n=8)。我们通过(A)半结构化个人访谈和(B)临床查房观察收集数据。我们使用 MAXQDA 软件 12 版对数据进行了演绎式内容分析。数据的可信度根据四个标准进行评估:可信度、可转移性、可依赖性和可确认性。研究结果本研究共有 14 名参与者,其中包括 6 名床旁榜样和 8 名医学生。医学教师和医学生的平均年龄分别为 50 岁和 29.6 岁。医学教师、医学生、实习生和住院医师的平均访谈时间分别为 20 分钟、25 分钟、30 分钟和 20 分钟。研究结果显示,三个周期和十二个阶段有助于形成最佳床旁教学模式。其中包括准备周期(包括准备、计划和引导)、临床接触周期(包括介绍、互动、指导、强化、监督和总结)和总结周期(包括汇报、反馈和反思)。结论教育模式可以更好地促进学习者掌握各种临床技能和专业行为,而这些都是学习中不可或缺的组成部分。我们从多批学员身上获得的经验有助于开发一种重要的模式,培养有形和无形的技能,从而培养出合格的医生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信