Breath of Knowledge: An Interactive Computer-Based Program and Group Exercise to Teach Gas Exchange.

IF 1.7 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
ATS scholar Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-10 DOI:10.34197/ats-scholar.2024-0065OC
Bryan Broderick, Sarah Kulkarni, Charles Wiener, David Shade, Jeff Day, Henry Fessler
{"title":"Breath of Knowledge: An Interactive Computer-Based Program and Group Exercise to Teach Gas Exchange.","authors":"Bryan Broderick, Sarah Kulkarni, Charles Wiener, David Shade, Jeff Day, Henry Fessler","doi":"10.34197/ats-scholar.2024-0065OC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Foundational principles of pulmonary gas exchange are complicated and can be difficult for trainees to master. Computer-based programs can provide opportunities for interactive instruction, but previous literature has not demonstrated the impact of such programs on learning this topic. <b>Objective:</b> To evaluate whether the addition of an interactive, clinically relevant computer-based gas exchange program and small-group exercise to reinforce principles of gas exchange improves medical student learning as measured by performance on relevant multiple-choice exam questions. <b>Methods:</b> This was a pre-post study design surrounding the implementation of a gas exchange program used during a small-group session with students working through a manual of prepared experiments during the 2023-2024 academic year at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Student examination scores before program implementation (academic year 2022-23) were compared with student examination scores after program implementation. Questions were dichotomized <i>a priori</i> based on their relevance to the principles reinforced by the program. Student perceptions of the program were assessed by a postcourse survey. <b>Results:</b> When comparing the control (<i>n</i> = 106) and intervention (<i>n</i> = 114) groups, scores improved for both non-gas exchange questions (<i>P</i> < 0.001) and gas exchange questions (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Although the improvement in gas exchange questions was greater than in other questions, this difference did not reach statistical significance (<i>P</i> = 0.09 for the interaction term). Most students were satisfied with the program and rated it more useful than a traditional didactic lecture. <b>Conclusion:</b> At a time when medical school instruction is dominated by lectures with few laboratory-based exercises, we offer this interactive, computer-based program as a strategy to reinforce principles of gas exchange. By tailoring accompanying cases and exercises to different groups of learners, this resource can be implemented in diverse settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":72330,"journal":{"name":"ATS scholar","volume":" ","pages":"74-84"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12008724/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ATS scholar","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2024-0065OC","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Foundational principles of pulmonary gas exchange are complicated and can be difficult for trainees to master. Computer-based programs can provide opportunities for interactive instruction, but previous literature has not demonstrated the impact of such programs on learning this topic. Objective: To evaluate whether the addition of an interactive, clinically relevant computer-based gas exchange program and small-group exercise to reinforce principles of gas exchange improves medical student learning as measured by performance on relevant multiple-choice exam questions. Methods: This was a pre-post study design surrounding the implementation of a gas exchange program used during a small-group session with students working through a manual of prepared experiments during the 2023-2024 academic year at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Student examination scores before program implementation (academic year 2022-23) were compared with student examination scores after program implementation. Questions were dichotomized a priori based on their relevance to the principles reinforced by the program. Student perceptions of the program were assessed by a postcourse survey. Results: When comparing the control (n = 106) and intervention (n = 114) groups, scores improved for both non-gas exchange questions (P < 0.001) and gas exchange questions (P < 0.001). Although the improvement in gas exchange questions was greater than in other questions, this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.09 for the interaction term). Most students were satisfied with the program and rated it more useful than a traditional didactic lecture. Conclusion: At a time when medical school instruction is dominated by lectures with few laboratory-based exercises, we offer this interactive, computer-based program as a strategy to reinforce principles of gas exchange. By tailoring accompanying cases and exercises to different groups of learners, this resource can be implemented in diverse settings.

知识的呼吸:以电脑为基础的互动式课程与小组练习来教授气体交换。
背景:肺气体交换的基本原理比较复杂,学员很难掌握。基于计算机的程序可以提供互动教学的机会,但以前的文献并没有证明这种程序对学习这一主题的影响。目的:通过测试医学生在多项选择题上的表现,评估加入交互式的、临床相关的计算机气体交换项目和小组练习来强化气体交换原则是否能改善医学生的学习。方法:这是一项围绕气体交换计划实施的前后研究设计,该计划是在约翰霍普金斯大学医学院2023-2024学年期间,学生在一个小组会议上通过准备好的实验手册进行的。将项目实施前(2022-23学年)学生考试成绩与项目实施后学生考试成绩进行比较。根据问题与该计划所强化的原则的相关性,将问题先验地分为两类。学生对课程的看法是通过课后调查来评估的。结果:与对照组(n = 106)和干预组(n = 114)比较,非气体交换问题的得分均有所提高(交互项P P P = 0.09)。大多数学生对这个项目感到满意,认为它比传统的说教式讲座更有用。结论:当医学院的教学以讲座为主,很少有实验室练习时,我们提供这个交互式的、基于计算机的程序作为加强气体交换原则的策略。通过为不同的学习者群体量身定制附带的案例和练习,该资源可以在不同的环境中实施。
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
11 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信