Introducing computer-assisted training sessions in the clinical skills lab at the Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University

Figures & data

Table

Practice points
•Computer assisted learning (CAL) would help schools with high student: faculty ratios in clinical training.
•Students’ involvement in the process of production and evaluation of training materials is of great importance.
•Locally produced CAL materials might be better than just purchasing ready-made materials that may not suit the learning environment.
•Faculty members should be encouraged to participate in the production of their CAL materials.
•The application of trials or intervention studies in medical education research is urgently needed, but the limitations related to bylaws and regulations need to be solved first.

Table 1.  Students' opinions about total quality of total skills

	Faculty (n = 139)		Students (n = 924)		X^2 test
	No.	%	No.	%	p-value
Scientific content
Poor	0	0.0	25	2.7
Good	9	6.5	181	19.6	46.77
Very good	67	48.2	536	58.0	<0.001*
Excellent	63	45.3	182	19.7
Steps of skill application
Poor	0	0.0	34	3.7
Good	21	15.1	236	25.6	84.65
Very good	49	35.3	504	54.5	<0.001*
Excellent	69	49.6	150	16.2
Use of illustrations
Poor	3	2.2	40	4.3
Good	18	12.9	272	29.4	68.51
Very good	54	38.8	460	49.8	<0.001*
Excellent	64	46.0	152	16.5
Technical quality (video)
Poor	3	2.2	101	11.0
Good	19	13.7	270	29.2	83.33
Very good	54	38.3	419	45.3	<0.001*
Excellent	63	45.3	134	14.5
Technical quality (audio)
Poor	6	4.3	187	20.2
Good	16	11.5	245	26.5	82.99
Very good	60	43.2	369	40.0	<0.001*
Excellent	57	41.0	123	13.3
Total opinion
Poor	3	2.2	37	4.0
Good	15	10.8	351	38.0	89.37
Very good	88	63.3	492	53.2	<0.001*
Excellent	33	23.7	44	4.8

*Statistically significant at p < 0.05.

Table 2.  Students' satisfaction with suitability for use in students’ training

	Faculty (n = 139)		Students (n = 924)		X^2 test
	No.	%	No.	%	p-value
Overall satisfaction with product
Poor	3	2.2	13	1.4
Fair	2	1.4	44	4.8
Good	18	13.0	316	34.2	42.18
Very good	73	52.9	422	45.7	<0.001*
Excellent	42	30.4	129	14.0
Product suitable for students training
No	14	10.1	55	6.0
Yes after modification	19	13.7	574	62.1	116.95
Yes	106	76.2	295	31.9	<0.001*

*Statistically significant at p < 0.05.

Figure 1. Correlation between external and internal evaluators’ assessment of students performance in skills lab after use of computer-assisted training.

Table 3.  Students’ satisfaction with skills’ suitability for use in self training*

Will use this product in self training	Frequency	Percent
No	60	6.5
Rarely	89	9.7
Frequently	322	34.9
Yes	451	48.9

*2 missing.

Table 4.  Comparison of students’ assessment in skills after use of computer-assisted skills training with previous years

	Previous years
	02/03	03/04	04/05	05/06
	(n = 207)	(n = 187)	(n = 168)	(n = 175)
No. of failure times:
1	73	17	7	2
2	0	5	1	0
3	0	3	0	0
Total students failed	73	25	8	2
Total times failure	73	36	9	2
X^2 test (comparing 05/06  with previous years)	69.98, p < 0.001*	31.55, p < 0.001*	4.90, p = 0.03*

(*)Statistically significant at p < 0.05.