![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the impact of three different training formats in occupational medicine (OM) on perceptions and performance of undergraduate students.
Methods: A comparative study which included all fourth-year medical students was conducted over a three-year period. The year group in 2010 (211 students) received paper case studies followed by one small group session. The format used in 2011 actively engaged 188 students in the learning process by adding collaborative work and group discussions to the written information. In 2012, the approach comprised no longer constructed text cases but 212 students encountered real patients. Students’ perceptions were obtained by questionnaire. Their learning performance was assessed through review of written reports and score on oral presentations. Statistical differences in ratings were analyzed using Fisher’s exact and Kruskal–Wallis tests.
Results: All three formats were found to equally achieve the stated learning objectives. The year groups with incorporation of active learning strategies and patient contacts had significant better test performance compared to those receiving only written case studies. Real patient students gave statistically significant higher rates for relevance, authenticity and appropriate difficulty level of the training than did students who discussed written case studies.
Conclusion: Both approaches with augmented interaction in 2011 and 2012, improved performance and satisfaction among students. However, students valued the use of real patients higher than paper-form cases.
Acknowledgements
We thank all the students, occupational physicians and patients who contributed to the development and evaluation of our teaching approaches.
Declaration of interest: This work was supported by Ghent University, Department of Educational Affairs. The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the article.