Health science staff and student experiences of teaching and assessing clinical skills using digital tools: a qualitative study

References

• Beatty B, ed. Values and principles of hybrid-flexible course design. London (UK): EdTech Books; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen A, Nørgård RT, Mor Y. Hybrid learning spaces—design, data, didactics. Brit J Educ Technol. 2020;51(4):1–15. Wiley Online Library doi: 10.1111/bjet.12964.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pei L, Wu H. Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ Online. 2019;24(1):1666538. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2019.1666538.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies, Washington, D.C., 2009.
   Google Scholar
• McCutcheon K, Lohan M, Traynor M, et al. A systematic review evaluating the impact of online or blended learning vs. face‐to‐face learning of clinical skills in undergraduate nurse education. J Adv Nurs. 2015;71(2):255–270. doi: 10.1111/jan.12509.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbasi MS, Ahmed N, Sajjad B, et al. E-Learning perception and satisfaction among health sciences students amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Work. 2020;67(3):549–556. doi: 10.3233/WOR-203308.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Forde C, OBrien A. A literature review of barriers and opportunities presented by digitally enhanced practical skill teaching and learning in health science education. Med Educ Online. 2022;27(1):2068210. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2022.2068210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhart A, Malzkorn B, Döing C, et al. Undergraduate medical education amid COVID-19: a qualitative analysis of enablers and barriers to acquiring competencies in distant learning using focus groups. Med Educ Online. 2021;26(1):1940765. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2021.1940765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan CS, Vasanthi RK, Subramaniam A. Physiotherapy students’ perceptions of e-Practical learning on achieving learning outcomes–a pandemic perspective. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2022;21(4):355–364. doi: 10.26803/ijlter.21.4.20.
   Google Scholar
• Khalil R, Mansour AE, Fadda WA, et al. The sudden transition to synchronized online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia: a qualitative study exploring medical students’ perspectives. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):285. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02208-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muflih S, Abuhammad S, Al-Azzam S, et al. Online learning for undergraduate health professional education during COVID-19: jordanian medical students’ attitudes and perceptions. Heliyon. 2021;7(9):e08031. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08031.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace D, Sturrock A, Gishen F. ‘You’ve got mail!’: clinical and practical skills teaching re-imagined during COVID-19. Future Healthc J. 2021;8(1):e50–e53. doi: 10.7861/fhj.2020-0231.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eltaybani S, Abdelhalim GE, Abdelgawad ME. Nursing students’ and educators’ experience with e‐learning during a pandemic: an online survey. Nurs Forum. 2021;56(4):878–888. doi: 10.1111/nuf.12634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alqudah NM, Jammal HM, Saleh O, et al. Perception and experience of academic jordanian ophthalmologists with E-Learning for undergraduate course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2020;59:44–47. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2020.09.014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bdair IA. Nursing students’ and faculty members’ perspectives about online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study. Teach Learn Nurs. 2021;16(3):220–226. doi: 10.1016/j.teln.2021.02.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khamis NN, Satava RM, Alnassar SA, et al. A stepwise model for simulation-based curriculum development for clinical skills, a modification of the six-step approach. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(1):279–287. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4206-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaltman S, Talisman N, Pennestri S, et al. Using technology to enhance teaching of patient-centered interviewing for early medical students. Simul Healthc. 2018;13(3):188–194. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000304.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kononowicz AA, Woodham LA, Edelbring S, et al. Virtual patient simulations in health professions education: systematic review and meta-analysis by the digital health education collaboration. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(7):e14676. doi: 10.2196/14676.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao F, Murphy D, Wu J-C, et al. How technology-enhanced experiential e-learning can facilitate the development of person-centred communication skills online for health-care students: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03127-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choate J, Aguilar-Roca N, Beckett E, et al. International educators’ attitudes, experiences, and recommendations after an abrupt transition to remote physiology laboratories. Adv Physiol Educ. 2021;45(2):310–321. doi: 10.1152/advan.00241.2020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Doherty D, Dromey M, Lougheed J, et al. Barriers and solutions to online learning in medical education – an integrative review. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):130. doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1240-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regmi K, Jones L. A systematic review of the factors–enablers and barriers–affecting e-learning in health sciences education. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):91. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02007-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Killen C, Didymus L. Student digital experience insights survey 2021/22: higher education findings Online: JISC, analytics JD; 2022 Sept 6.
   Google Scholar
• Anthony Jnr B. An exploratory study on academic staff perception towards blended learning in higher education. Educ Inf Technol. 2022;27(3):3107–3133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krueger RA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. California (USA): Sage Publications; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, et al. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245–1251. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbour RS. Making sense of focus groups. Med Educ. 2005;39(7):742–750. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02200.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(13):1753–1760. doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893–1907. doi: 10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exercise Health. 2019;11(4):589–597. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner P, Slater H, Jordan JE, et al. Physiotherapy students’ perspectives of online e-learning for interdisciplinary management of chronic health conditions: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16(1):62. doi: DOI doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0593-5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ramos-Morcillo AJ, Leal-Costa C, Moral-García JE, et al. Experiences of nursing students during the abrupt change from face-to-face to e-learning education during the first month of confinement due to COVID-19 in Spain. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(15):5519. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17155519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denzin N. The fundamentals. An introduction to triangulation. In: Rugg D, editor. UNAIDS monitoring and evaluation fundamentals. Geneva, Switzerland: UNAIDS; 2010; p. 12. Available from: https://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/sub_landing/files/10_4-Intro-to-triangulation-MEF.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Scharp KM, Sanders ML. What is a theme? Teaching thematic analysis in qualitative communication research methods. Commun Teach. 2019;33(2):117–121. doi: 10.1080/17404622.2018.1536794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritchie J, Spencer L. The qualitative researcher’s companion. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications, Inc; 2023. Available from: https://methods.sagepub.com/book/the-qualitative-researchers-companion.
   Google Scholar
• Citizens Information Board. Third-level courses for mature students [Webpage]. 2022 Feb 24. Available from: https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/third_level_education/applying_to_college/third_level_courses_for_mature_students.html.
   Google Scholar
• Stone D, Longhurst GJ, Dulohery K, et al. A multicentre analysis of approaches to learning and student experiences of learning anatomy online. Med Sci Educ. 2022;32(5):1117–1130. doi: 10.1007/s40670-022-01633-7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee T, Yoon SW, Fernando S, et al. Blended (online and in-person) women’s health interprofessional learning by simulation (WHIPLS) for medical and midwifery students. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022;62(4):596–604. doi: 10.1111/ajo.13531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brockman RM, Taylor JM, Segars LW, et al. Student perceptions of online and in-person microbiology laboratory experiences in undergraduate medical education. Med Educ Online. 2020;25(1):1710324. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2019.1710324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morton CE, Saleh SN, Smith SF, et al. Blended learning: how can we optimise undergraduate student engagement? BMC Med Educ. 2016;16(1):195. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0716-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison D, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. Internet High Educ. 1999;2(2–3):87–105. doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6.
   Google Scholar
• Davis D, McLaughlin MK, Anderson KM. Universal design for learning: a framework for blended learning in nursing education. Nurse Educ. 2022;47(3):133–138. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000001116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton JE. Cash or kudos: addressing the effort-reward imbalance for academic employees. Int J Stress Manage. 2019;26(2):193–203. doi: 10.1037/str0000107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradforth S, Miller E, Dichtel W, et al. Improve undergraduate science education: it is time to use evidence-based teaching practices at all levels by providing incentives and effective evaluations. Nature. 2015;523(7560):282–284. doi: 10.1038/523282a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dennin M, Schultz ZD, Feig A, et al. Aligning practice to policies: changing the culture to recognize and reward teaching at research universities. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2017;16(4):es5. doi: 10.1187/cbe.17-02-0032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Štemberger T, Konrad SČ. Attitudes towards using digital technologies in education as an important factor in developing digital competence: the case of Slovenian student teachers. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2021;16(14):83–98. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v16i14.22649.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kern DE, Thomas PA, Hughes MT. Curriculum development for medical education: a Six-Step approach. 2nd ed. Baltimore (MD): The John’s Hopkins University Press; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien A, Forde C. DEPTH – Digitally Enhanced Practical Teaching in the Health Sciences Ireland: National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education; 2022 Sept 6. Available from: https://my.opencourses.ie/course/view.php?id=95.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao J, Xu X, Jiang H, et al. The effectiveness of virtual reality-based technology on anatomy teaching: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):127. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-1994-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcos-Pablos S, Garcia-Penalvo FJ. More than surgical tools: a systematic review of robots as didactic tools for the education of professionals in health sciences. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2022;27(4):1139–1176. doi: 10.1007/s10459-022-10118-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guze PA. Using technology to meet the challenges of medical education. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2015;126:260–270. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26330687.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar