Application of problem-based learning combined with simulated standardized patient teaching model in teaching diagnostics of acute myocardial infarction

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2019.04.014

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the application of problem-based learning (PBL) combined with simulated standardized patient (SP) teaching mode in teaching diagnostics of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

From March 2016 to March 2017, 153 students in three classes of undergraduate clinical medicine specialty in grade 2013 were selected as the subjects of study, who were taught by the same professor in the theoretical courses, and the teaching contents were all about the diagnostic methods of AMI. The students were randomly divided into control group, PBL group and experimental group with 51 cases in each group. The control group received traditional teaching mode, the PBL group received PBL and theoretical teaching mode, and the experimental group received PBL and SP teaching mode. The theoretical results, medical record writing, students′ satisfaction and teachers′ satisfaction with students′ performance were compared among the three groups.

Results

The scores of medical record writing [(80.56±7.23)points] and theoretical knowledge [(79.84±5.63)points] in the experimental group were higher than those in the PBL group [(76.24±6.45)points, (74.28±5.05)points] and control group [(70.21±6.13)points, (69.56±4.89)points]. The differences were statistically significant (F₁=31.45, 49.95, all P<0.01). The scores of physical examination [(17.38±1.27)points], medical history [(49.47±1.34)points] and chief complaint [(16.82±0.67)points] of the experimental group were higher than those of PBL group [(14.23±1.06)points, (44.88±1.21)points, (13.26±0.54)points] and control group [(11.55±0.98)points, (40.52±1.04)points, (10.97±0.61)points]. The differences were statistically significant (F=352.43, 705.92, 1 195.02, all P<0.01). Teachers′ satisfaction with students′ performance in the experimental group was (42/51, 82.35%) higher than that in the PBL group (60.78%, 37/51) and the control group (43.14%, 22/51) (χ²=16.72, P<0.01).

Conclusion

The application of PBL combined with SP teaching mode in teaching diagnostics of AMI can effectively improve students′ learning enthusiasm and initiative, improve students′ and teachers′ satisfaction, improve teacher-student relationship and teaching quality.

Key words: Problem-based learning, Standardized patient, Myocardial infarction, Diagnostics, Satisfaction

Wen Dai, Guanghe Wei, Shaohui Zhang, Xin Zhao, Shanshan Dai, Nana Zhang. Application of problem-based learning combined with simulated standardized patient teaching model in teaching diagnostics of acute myocardial infarction[J]. Chinese Journal of Diagnostics(Electronic Edition), 2019, 07(04): 284-288.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhzdxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2019.04.014

https://zhzdxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V07/I04/284

Figures/Tables 4

References 18

[1]	Thiele H, Schuler G, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock：design and rationale of the Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock Ⅱ (IABP-SHOCK Ⅱ) trial[J]．Am Heart J，2015，169(4):e7-e8.
[2]	卢书明，梁丽娜，孟华，等．慕课教学模式在诊断学教学中的应用[J/CD]．中华诊断学电子杂志，2017，5(1):37-39.
[3]	祝海洲，雷学锋，张磊，等．三明治教学法应用于医学桥梁课合堂班教学的探讨[J/CD]．中华诊断学电子杂志，2017，5(1):31-33.
[4]	齐殿君，于晓松，王爽，等．开展以问题为基础学习改善医学生交流恐惧的远期研究[J]．中华医学教育杂志，2016，36(2):249-252.
[5]	马瑞，王玲珠，吴娟娟，等．医学生对临床见习中诊断学新型教学模式认识状况的调查[J/CD]．中华诊断学电子杂志，2017，5(1):26-30.
[6]	黄蕾，管晓枫，苏娜，等．以问题为基础学习教学对医学生批判性思维培养效果的研究[J]．中华医学教育杂志，2015，35(6):888-891.
[7]	赵英杰，李颖，颜凡辉，等．急性心肌梗死缺血后处理对患者发生心肌梗死后心力衰竭的影响[J/CD]．中华诊断学电子杂志，2018，6(3):185-188.
[8]	Li J, Dreyer RP, Li X, et al. China patient-centered evaluative assessment of cardiac events prospective study of acute myocardial infarction：study design[J]．Chin Medical J(Engl)，2016，129(1):72-80.
[9]	贾雪，曾雯，张琴，等．Seminar教学法与传统讲授教学法对国内临床医学生教学效果的系统评价[J]．华西医学，2018，33(3):332-338.
[10]	杜爱玲，王新友，杨世昌．以问题为基础教学模式和传统教学模式在我国神经病学临床实习教学效果的Meta分析[J]．新乡医学院学报，2015，32(3):286-288.
[11]	Ross JG, Burrell SA.Standardized patient simulation to facilitate learning in evidence-based oncology symptom management[J]．J Nurs Educ，2018，57(4):250-253.
[12]	Speeney N, Kameg KM, Cline T, et al. Impact of a standardized patient simulation on undergraduate nursing student knowledge and perceived competency of the care of a patient diagnosed with schizophrenia[J]．Arch Psychiatr Nurs，2018，32(6):845-849.
[13]	Bond WF, Gonzalez HC, Funk AM, et al. Deliberate practice with standardized patient actors and the development of formative feedback for advance care planning facilitators[J]．J Palliat Med，2017，20(6):631-637.
[14]	杨桦．PBL教学方法联合技能考核在妇产科教学中的应用研究[J]．中国医刊，2015，50(10):108-110.
[15]	王喆，杨新春．PBL教学模式在临床医学教学中的应用[J]．中国病案，2016，17(7):91-93.
[16]	邓可武，史旭波．PBL教学法在心内科住院医师规范化培训教学中的应用[J]．中国医药导刊，2016，18(7):745-746.
[17]	周艳丽，史铁英，陆靖，等．PBL结合案例教学法在心内科护理本科生临床实践教学中的应用[J]．重庆医学，2015，44(16):2291-2293.
[18]	金国玺，高涌，毕娅欣，等．内科学教学中CBL和PBL教学法的联合运用[J]．中华全科医学，2016，14(4):672-675.

组别	人数	理论知识	病历书写
试验组	51	79.84±5.63	80.56±7.23
PBL组	51	74.28±5.05^a	76.24±6.45^a
对照组	51	69.56±4.89^b	70.21±6.13^b
F值	?	49.95	31.45
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01

组别	人数	理论知识	病历书写
试验组	51	79.84±5.63	80.56±7.23
PBL组	51	74.28±5.05^a	76.24±6.45^a
对照组	51	69.56±4.89^b	70.21±6.13^b
F值	?	49.95	31.45
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01

组别	人数	体格检查	病史	主诉	总分
试验组	51	17.38±1.27	49.47±1.34	16.82±0.67	83.67±1.89
PBL组	51	14.23±1.06^a	44.88±1.21^a	13.26±0.54^a	72.37±1.54^a
对照组	51	11.55±0.98^b	40.52±1.04^b	10.97±0.61^b	63.04±1.59^b
F值	?	352.43	705.92	1 195.02	1 927.40
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01

组别	人数	体格检查	病史	主诉	总分
试验组	51	17.38±1.27	49.47±1.34	16.82±0.67	83.67±1.89
PBL组	51	14.23±1.06^a	44.88±1.21^a	13.26±0.54^a	72.37±1.54^a
对照组	51	11.55±0.98^b	40.52±1.04^b	10.97±0.61^b	63.04±1.59^b
F值	?	352.43	705.92	1 195.02	1 927.40
P值	?	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01

项目	试验组(n＝51)				PBL组(n＝51)				对照组(n＝51)				χ ²值	P值
项目	非常满意(人)	满意(人)	不满意(人)	满意度(%)	非常满意(人)	满意(人)	不满意(人)	满意度(%)	非常满意(人)	满意(人)	不满意(人)	满意度(%)	χ ²值	P值
对自己理论知识掌握程度	23	27	1	98.04	20	23	8	84.31	16	24	11	78.43	9.09	P<0.05
激发自己的学习兴趣	30	19	2	96.08	22	23	6	88.24	19	20	12	76.47	8.74	P<0.05
激发学习积极性和主观能动性	26	21	4	92.16	28	15	8	84.31	24	13	14	72.55	7.04	P<0.05
愿意查阅有关书籍、文献资料	20	29	2	96.08	18	26	7	86.27	25	13	13	74.51	9.66	P<0.05
能将理论知识与临床问题联系，提高临床思维能力	32	18	1	98.04	16	30	5	90.20	16	24	11	78.43	10.06	P<0.05
能提高团结合作、共同解决问题的能力	29	19	3	94.12	28	17	6	88.24	19	18	14	72.55	9.93	P<0.05
赞成本组教学法	35	15	1	98.04	25	19	7	86.27	18	20	13	74.51	11.92	P<0.05

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export