4.1 Article

Progress Toward Improving Medical School Graduates' Skills via a Boot Camp Curriculum

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000001

关键词

Clinical skill assessment; Simulation-based education; Boot camp

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction Medical school graduates are expected to possess a broad array of clinical skills. However, concerns have been raised regarding the preparation of medical students to enter graduate medical education. We designed a simulation-based boot camp experience for students entering internal medicine residency and compared medical student performance with the performance of historical controls who did not complete boot camp. Methods This was a cohort study of a simulation-based boot camp educational intervention. Twenty medical students completed 2 days (16 hours) of small group simulation-based education and individualized feedback and skills assessment. Skills included (a) physical examination techniques (cardiac auscultation); technical procedures including (b) paracentesis and (c) lumbar puncture; (d) recognition and management of patients with life-threatening conditions (intensive care unit clinical skills/mechanical ventilation); and (e) communication with patients and families (code status discussion). Student posttest scores were compared with baseline scores of postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) historical controls to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Results Boot camp-trained medical students performed significantly better than PGY-1 historical controls on each simulated skill (P < 0.01). Results remained significant after controlling for age, sex, and US Medical Licensing Examination step 1 and 2 scores (P < 0.001). Conclusions A 2-day simulation-based boot camp for graduating medical students boosted a variety of clinical skills to levels significantly higher than PGY-1 historical controls. Simulation-based education shows promise to help ensure that medical school graduates are prepared to begin postgraduate training.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据