1.
|
Dr.S.Vijaya Kumari
|
Assistant Professor,
Department of Pharmacology |
Guntur Medical College,
Guntur |
2.
|
Dr.V.Mahesh Kumar Chinta
|
Assistant Professor,
Department of Community Medicine
|
Alluri Sitaramaraju Academy of Medical Sciences
Eluru |
3.
|
Dr.D.Manikyamba
|
Professor,
Department of Pediatrics |
Rangaraya Medical College
Kakinada |
4.
|
Dr.V.Satya Prasad
|
Associate Professor,
Department of Medicine |
Rangaraya Medical College
Kakinada |
5.
|
Dr.B.Arunasree
|
Associate Professor,
Department of Microbiology |
Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences,
Srikakulam |
6.
|
Dr. Uma Prasad
|
Associate Professor,
Department of Pathology
|
Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences,
Srikakulam |
7.
|
Dr.S.Sri Krishna Prakash
|
Assistant Professor,
Department of ENT |
NRI Institute of Medical Sciences
Sangivalasa
|
8.
|
Dr.A.Krishna Murty
|
Professor,
Department of Medicine
|
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
9.
|
Dr.T.Maruthi Chander Rao
|
Professor,
Department of Physiology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
10.
|
Dr.K.Kameswari
|
Professor,
Department of Pediatric Surgery |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
11.
|
Dr.R.Parvathi - report submitted & posted below
|
Professor,
Department of Physiology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
12.
|
Dr.P.Krishna Prasad
|
Professor,
Department of Ophthalmology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
13.
|
Dr.A.Bhagyalakshmi
|
Professor,
Department of Pathology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
14.
|
Dr.G.Raghunadh Babu
|
Professor,
Department of ENT |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
15.
|
Dr.Y.L.Narasinga Rao
|
Associate Professor
Department of Gynaecology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
16.
|
Dr.M.Sri Hari Babu
|
Associate Professor,
Department of Anatomy
|
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
17.
|
Dr.P.Ashok Kumar
|
Associate Professor,
Department of Orthopedics
|
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
18.
|
Dr.P.Anila Sunandini
|
Associate Professor,
Department of DVL |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
19.
|
Dr.Uma Maheswara Rao
|
Associate Professor
Department of Radiology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
20.
|
Dr.D.Vijayalakshmi
|
Associate Professor
Department of Psychiatry |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
21.
|
Dr.NAVSK Ravi Kumar
|
Assistant Professor
Department of Medicine |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
22.
|
Dr.V.Chandrasekhar
|
Assistant Professor,
Department of Forensic Medicine |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
23.
|
Dr.P.Kalyani
|
Assistant Professor
Department of Physiology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
24.
|
Dr.N.Rama Bharathi
|
Assistant Professor,
Department of Ophthalmology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
25.
|
Dr.P.Vijayasheela
|
Assistant Professor,
Department of Gynaecology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
26.
|
Dr.G.Aruna
|
Assistant Professor,
Department of Gynaecology |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
27.
|
Dr.A.Kalyani
|
Assistant Professor
Department of Surgery |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
28.
|
Dr.G.Vasavilatha
|
Assistant Professor
Department of Medicine |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
29.
|
Dr.Ch.Suryamani
|
Assistant Professor
Department of Microbiology
|
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
30.
|
Dr.S.Madhavi
|
Assistant Professor
Department of Community Medicine |
Andhra Medical College,
Visakhapatnam |
ramakrishna katuri
rajakumari katuri
to print - anila manjubhashini
-------
R.PARVATHI - AMC - PHYSIOLOGY
STUDENT EVALUATION OF A TEACHER AND TEACHING METHODS
Objective:
The objective of the present
Study is to receive feedback from the Medical Students regarding the Teacher
and the Teaching Methods and find innovative methods to improve Teaching.
Materials and Methods:
A set of Objective Questions
were prepared and the Students were asked to answer them.
The Final MBBS Students were
selected as they are exposed to a prolonged period of Teaching.
A total of 136 Students
participated in the Study.
A conclusion was derived
after analysis of the answers.
Analysis:
30% of the students are in
favor of Didactic Lectures as the best way of learning. Another 36% are in
favor of Group Discussion and 21% in Self Study.
More than half the Students
i.e. 60% are of the opinion that Didactic Lectures are the mainstay of
Teaching.
The interest of the Student
in the Didactic Lecture mainly depends on how the Teacher teaches as per 90% of
the Students.
The monotony of the Lecture
Class can be broken by the Teacher interacting more frequently with the Student
as per 46% of the Students whereas 50% opine that wit and humor interspersed by
the Teacher would make the Class more interesting.
Regarding how much of the
subject taught is retained at the end of the Class 50% feel they remember less
than half the subject. 34% remember at least half the subject. Only 6% of the
students retain more than half the subject whereas 19% retain none of the
subject.
The Students differ in equal
proportion regarding which session of the Class is interesting. For 42 % of the
Students the introduction to the new Topic is more interesting whereas 31% feel
the Teacher interacting with the Student by asking questions is interesting and
30 % feel the Revision of the previous Class is much more interesting.
The suggestion received from
the Students to make the Didactic Lecture interesting is to ask the Student
come prepared with the topic beforehand, the teacher first interacting with the
Student and then proceeding with the Class as per 51% of the Students. Around
23 % are interested in the Student acting out the Role Model of a Teacher for a
few minutes followed by a regular Lecture Class by the Teacher.
77 % of the Students feel
they are inspired by their Teachers in AMC which suggests that the Teaching is
up to the Standard in our Institution.
To the question of how a
Regular Student scores over an irregular student 90% are under the impression
that a Regular Student is under the constant Observation and good books of the
Teacher and is guided in his everyday Studies and is benefited during Exams.
58% of the Students are of
the opinion that the Theory Examination should be of the Objective Pattern and
27% feel Viva –Voce is a better method of evaluation than Theory Examination.
Conclusion:
Didactic lecture is the mainstay of
Teaching as per majority of the Students.
The Didactic Lecture can be
made interesting by the Teacher often interacting with the Students and his
frequent interspersion of the Class with wit and humor.
The Student acting out the
Role model of a Teacher followed by the Regular Class by the Teacher is another
way of making the Class interactive and interesting.
The best part of the Class
is when the new topic is introduced and during the revision of the previous
topic.
Around half the Students
retain the salient features of the Class at the end of the day.
A Regular Student scores
over an irregular Student as he is under the constant supervision of his
Teachers and is guided during his day to day activities as well as during
Exams.
Most of the students
preferred Objective Type Questions to Essay Questions in the Theory Paper and
some of them feel Viva Voce is the best way of evaluation of the Student rather
than Theory Examination.
The Standard of Teaching in
our Institute is up to the Standard as most of the Students are inspired by
their Teachers.
--------
Dr. Sanakkayala Rajkumari, Associate professor,Dept. of OBG, Katuri
medical college,Guntur
Evaluation of effectiveness of bedside teaching as an educational tool for
the acquisition of knowledge and promotion of critical thinking among students
Introduction
In
modern times our definition of bedside teaching includes teaching done in the
presence of patient regardless of setting. A broad definition of bedside
teaching that is done in the presence of patient. Bedside teaching is an effective
aid in teaching, demonstration and improves communication and procedural skills
of the student and also increases patient doctor student relationship. The aim
of this study is to know the effectiveness of bedside teaching among
postgraduates in their respective department and also to know the perspective
idea among teachers
Material
and methods
Material -
50
postgraduates and 20 teachers participated in the study. All were given
respective questionnaire. Bedside teaching was done in all the respective
departments. Feedback form was collected.
The
questionnaire was designed to measure
FOR
STUDENT
1.
Whether
they have an increased appreciation of
bedside teaching
2.
Students
are comfortable in front of the patient during bedside teaching
3.
Students
get additional information
4.
students
feel a waste of time
5.
Repetition
of history, physical examination that had already been discussed
6.
Increased
learning abilities by creating curiosity about the disease
7.
Improves
patient outcome
8.
Playing
as a role model showing how to interact with patients
9.
Strengthen
learning abilities
FOR
TEACHERS
1.
Liked
by the teacher
2.
Disliked
by the teacher
3.
Time
constraints
4.
Helps
in diagnose disease after hearing the presentation
5.
Helps
to change the management during rounds
6.
Diagnose
the learner’s strength, weakness, omission
7.
Do
you talk ‘what ifs’
8.
Do
you feel patient is uncomfortable
Student
questionnaire
question
|
yes
|
To
some extent
|
No
|
Not
applicable
|
1.
Whether
they have an increased appreciation of bedside teaching
|
||||
2.
Students are comfortable in front of the patient
during bedside teaching
|
||||
3.
Students get additional information
|
||||
4.
students feel a waste of time
|
||||
5.
Repetition of history, physical examination that
had already been discussed
|
||||
6.
Increased learning abilities by creating curiosity
about the disease
|
||||
7.
Playing as a role model showing how to interact
with patients
|
||||
8.
Improves patient outcome
|
||||
9.
Strengthen learning abilities
|
Teacher’s
questionnaire
Question
|
yes
|
To
some extent
|
No
|
Not
applicable
|
1.
Fear of patient discomfort
|
||||
2.
Teachers feel uncomfortable ( may lead to
discussion of medicine teacher not familiar with)
|
||||
3.
Talked more time
|
||||
4.
Lack of privacy, confidentiality
|
||||
5.
Students attitudes have changed
|
||||
6.
Time constraints
|
||||
7.
Giving additional information and guidance to
student
|
||||
8.
Better student patient facilitator relationship
|
||||
9.
Role model skills – encouraging student to
perform examination
|
||||
10.
Communication problem
|
Results
70
students and 20 teachers were included in the study. Separate Questionnaire
were distributed to teachers and students. Among teachers, 80% of teachers had
fear of patient discomfort and 20% had less fear of discomfort.
20%
of them were uncomfortable as they felt it may lead to subject which they are
not familiar,whereas 80% of teachers were comfortable with bedside teaching.
20%
of teachers felt they talked longer during bedside teaching, 20% had felt that
they took for enough time and 60% of teachers could not comment on time
duration as they felt it was variable.
60%
of teachers felt there was lack of privacy during bedside teaching,20% of
teachers felt to some extent, whereas 20% of teachers could maintain privacy
and confidentiality
60%
of teachers felt students attitude has changed, 40% of them felt to some extent
90%
of teachers had time constraints with bedside teaching
All
of them felt , bedside teaching gave additional information to students,
improves student patient and facilitator relationship. All the teachers felt
they could encourage students and be a roe model to improve the skills.
20%
of teachers had experienced communication problem and 80% had not shown
STUDENTS
questionnaire
All
students appreciated bedside teaching as they could get additional
information,create curiosity about the disease and also improve their
communication attitude skills with the patient. 10% of students were
uncomfortable in front of the patient during bedside teaching , 90% of them
were comfortable during bedside teaching.
90%
of students had felt history and examination were repeated.
80%
of students felt bedside teaching improved patient outcome.
Discussion
Effective
bedside teaching during rounds or OPD should actively involve the team. It
should be more invigorating and interesting than the conference room rounds.
Learners also felt that bedside teaching often required more time and repeated
parts of history and physical examination that already been discussed.
Therefore, facilitator must set
specific goals and time limits for bedside teaching. Topics that are best
taught at bedside should be reserved for this time
Advantages
1.
Opportunity
for additional information from patient
2.
Directly
observe students skill
3.
Role
model skills and attitude
4.
Encourage
the use of understandable and non judgmental
language
5.
Active
learning process
6.
Improves
patient understanding of disease and work up.
Disadvantages
1.
Fear
of patient discomfort
2.
Lack
of privacy, confidentiality
3.
Talked
more time
4.
Teachers
feel uncomfortable ( may lead to discussion of medicine teacher not familiar
with)
Conclusion
The teacher
plays a role model skills, attitude which are vital. Though modern medicine has
placed additional demands on all parties involved, but that should not be the
reason to abandon traditional teaching methods. Facilitators have to increase
their efforts to inculcate the curiosity for acquiring additional knowledge and
also improve skills by playing as a role model.
References
1.
BLISS,
M. (1999) William Osler: A Life in Medicine (New York, Oxford University
Press), p. 239. COX, K. (1993)
2.
Planning
bedside teaching, Medical Journal of Australia, 158, pp. 280–282, 355–357,
417–418, 493–495, 571–572, 607–608, 789–790. ENDE, J. (1983)
3.
Feedback in clinical medical education,
Journal of the American Medical Association, 250, pp. 777–781.
4.
MILLER,
M., JOHNSON, B., GREENE, H.L., BAIER, M. & NOWLIN, S. (1992) An
observational study of attending rounds, Journal of General Internal Medicine, 7,
pp. 646–648.
5.
NAIR, B.R., COUGHLAN, F.L. & HENSLEY, M.F.
(1997) Student and patient perspectives on bedside teaching, Medical Education,
31, pp. 341–346.
6.
NEHER,
J.O., GORDON, K.C., MEYER, B. & STEVENS, N. (1992) A five- step microskills
model of clinical teaching, Journal of the American Board of Family Practice,
5, pp. 419–424.
7.
WANG-CHENG,
R.M., BANAS, G.P., SIGMANN, P., RIENDL, P.A. & YOUNG, M.J. (1989) Bedside
case presentations: why patients like them but learners don’t, Journal of General
Internal Medicine, 4, pp. 284–287.
8.
WRIGHT,
S.M., KERN, D.E., KOLODNER, K., HOWARD, D.M. & BRANCATI, F.L. (1998)
Attributes of excellent attending-physician role models, New England Journal of
Medicine, 339, pp. 1986–1993.
------------
Dr.Ramakrishna Narra, Associate Professor-Radiology, Katuri Medical College, Guntur
Title: Evaluation
of effectiveness of journal club as a teaching tool in Postgraduate curriculum
Introduction:
Journal clubs are educational
meetings where individuals meet regularly to critically evaluate recent
articles in the scientific literature. They have often been cited as a bridge
between research and practice, as they encourage the application of research in
clinical practice
The earliest reference of
journal club was by Sir James Paget who, in the mid-1800s, described a group at
St Bartholomew's Hospital in London, as a “’kind of club . . . a small room over a baker's shop near the
hospital-gate, where we could sit and read the journals.”
Many academic training
programs include a journal club.They have long been recognized as a means of
keeping up to date with the literature; promoting evidence based medicine; and
teaching critical appraisal skills. In order for trainee doctors to be able to
adapt to ever-changing circumstances, in clinical practice, they need to equip
themselves with the skills of critical appraisal, and the ability to apply new
knowledge. Journal clubs also help to keep permanent staff updated.
Advantages of a journal club
1.
Help
people to learn and improve their critical appraisal skills
2.
Encourage
evidence based medicine
3.
Promote
awareness of research skills
4.
Keep
abreast with new literature
5.
Encourage
use of research
6.
Promote
social contact
7.
Provide
continuing medical education
8.
Stimulate
debate and improved understanding of current topics.
Disadvantages
The discussion is one sided
with no direct contact / accessibility with the author or the researcher.
Methodology
The present project was conducted at Katuri
medical college and hospital. Postgraduate
trainee students were given questionnaire regarding the impact of journal club
in their present training curriculum. Seventy three postgraduates belonging to
various clinical departments participated in the study.
The sample questionnaire included
1) Whether journal club was
regularly conducted by the department as scheduled in the
department
(yes/no)
2) Do you find it helpful in enhancing knowledge in
the subject (yes/no)
3) On what aspect of your skills was the journal club had the impact
maximum
(Theoretical
knowledge, clinical skills, research skills)
4) How frequently in a week you wish journal club conducted
(Once, twice or more)
5) Do you feel journal club as a tool to enhance practice of evidence
based medicine
(Yes/no)
6) Advantages and disadvantages of journal club
7) Suggestions regarding conducting a journal club.
Results and Discussion
All the trainee postgraduate
students were aware of the concept of journal club and all the departments were
conducting the journal club regularly as scheduled and all the students found
it helpful in enhancing their skills.
In my study sample, 40 % of the
students feel that journal club had maximum impact in enhancing their clinical
skills, 45 % feel it had impact in enhancing their theoretical knowledge and 15%
felt it had impact on their research skills
In the present study 90% of
trainees wished they have journal club scheduled once weekly while 6% wished it
to be scheduled twice weekly and 4% wished more than twice a week.
All the trainees feel journal club
enhances the practice of evidence based medicine.
In addition to the regular
advantages, postgraduate students feel journal club acts as a bridge to connect
the practice of medicine from different parts of the world. Postgraduate
students feel that the focus should be on recent journals, so that they can be
updated with recent advances and articles from standard journals from different
parts of the world should be reviewed rather than focusing a single journal.
Conclusion
Journal clubs enhance the skills,
promote evidence based medicine and update the knowledge of recent advances
among the postgraduate students and must be scheduled regularly as part of
teaching method in postgraduate curriculum.
******************
