摘要
目的将"启发式"教学查房应用于心血管内科疾病教学中,观察其应用效果。方法于2017年1至3月将新疆医科大学第一附属医院内科基地住培医师56名,随机分为试验组和对照组,每组28名,试验组主要采取"启发式"教学查房,对照组主要采取传统教学查房。应用访谈法对两组指导教师、住培医师、上级医生、护理人员针对教学查房的准备、实施过程、预期达到的目标及效果分别进行访谈;56名住培医师对指导教师的准备、指导过程、指导方法、查房效果进行满意度评价;采用SPSS 19.0进行统计分析,各项评价结果采用秩和检验。结果试验组住培医师在指导教师对病情的熟悉程度(82.15% vs. 30.86%)、指导培训对象人文关怀(92.86% vs. 39.29%)、查体(96.43% vs. 28.57%)、分析辅助检查(85.71% vs. 35.71%)、书写病历(85.72% vs. 14.29%)、总结病例特点(78.57% vs. 35.71%)、诊断及鉴别诊断(85.71% vs. 21.43%)、作出诊疗计划(85.71% vs. 25.00%)、提问方式(89.29% vs. 30.72%)、讲解疑难问题和新进展(78.57% vs. 17.86%)、小结学习内容(92.85% vs. 28.58%)方面的满意度明显高于对照组;试验组住培医师在教学查房对沟通(96.43% vs. 46.43%)、病史采集技巧(85.72% vs. 21.43%)、检查手法(92.86% vs. 28.57%)、临床思维(92.86% vs. 28.57%)、学习兴趣(96.43% vs. 25.00%)和效率(85.71% vs. 14.28%)、知识的理解和记忆(85.72% vs. 28.57%)、分析解决问题的能力(89.29% vs. 21.43%)、团队协作能力(67.86% vs. 28.57%)提高方面的满意度明显高于对照组(P<0.05)。结论"启发式"教学查房重视课前准备、课后小结,注重住培医师主动参与,融入人文关怀与沟通技巧,重视团队协作,可充分发挥住培医师能动性,保证高效学习。
Objective The "heuristic" teaching rounds were applied to cardiovascular diseases and we observed the application effect. Methods From January to March 2017, 56 resident physicians at internal medicine base in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University were randomly divided into the experimental group and the control group, with 28 people of each group. The experimental group mainly adopted heuristic teaching rounds, and the control group adopted conventional teaching rounds. Interview method was used to interview the instructors, resident physicians, doctors and nurses in preparation for teaching rounds, the implementation process, the expected goals and effects. 56 resident physicians evaluated the preparation, guidance process, guidance methods and outcomes of ward rounds. SPSS 19.0 was used for statistical analysis, and rank sum test was used for evaluation results. Results As to the familiarity of the instructor on the condition (82.15% vs. 30.86%), guiding the training of humanistic care (92.86% vs. 39.29%), physical examination (96.43% vs. 28.57%), analysis of auxiliary examination (85.71% vs. 35.71%), writing medical records (85.72% vs. 14.29%), summarizing the characteristics of cases (78.57% vs. 35.71%), diagnosis and differential diagnosis (85.71% vs. 21.43%), treatment plan making (85.71% vs. 25.00%), question formulation (89.29% vs. 30.72%), explanation of difficult problems and new progress (78.57% vs. 17.86%), content summary (92.85% vs. 28.58%) the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group. In the experimental group, the teaching rounds of communication (96.43% vs. 46.43%), history acquisition techniques (85.72% vs. 21.43%), examination techniques (92.86% vs. 28.57%), clinical thinking (92.86% vs. 28.57%), learning interests (96.43% vs. 25.00%) and efficiency (85.71% vs. 14.28%), the understanding and memory of knowledge (85.72% vs. 28.57%), the problem solving ability (89.29% vs. 21.43%), improvement of team collaboration (67.86% vs. 28.57%) were signifi
作者
马丽娟
李发鹏
彭巧君
李英
Ma Lijuan;Li Fapeng;Peng Qiaojun;Li Ying(Department of Outpatient, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Wulumuqi 830054, China)
出处
《中华医学教育探索杂志》
2019年第6期614-619,共6页
Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research
关键词
启发式
教学查房
住培医师
Heuristic
Teaching rounds
Resident physicians
