文章摘要
宫晨,王建华,郭风劲,等.案例教学法联合多学科协作的教学模式在骨肿瘤临床教学中的应用.骨科,2018,9(4): 320-323.
案例教学法联合多学科协作的教学模式在骨肿瘤临床教学中的应用
Application of case-based learning combined with multidisciplinary teamwork in bone tumor clinical teaching
投稿时间:2018-01-26  
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8573.2018.04.013
中文关键词: 临床教学  骨肿瘤  案例教学  多学科协作
英文关键词: Clinical teaching  Bone tumor  Case-based learning  Multidisciplinary teamwork
基金项目:湖北省卫生和计划生育委员会科研基金(WJ2017-M058);华中科技大学第二临床学院教学研究基金(2016年度)
作者单位E-mail
宫晨 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院肿瘤科  
王建华 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院肿瘤科  
郭风劲 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院骨科  
张明生 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院肿瘤科  
邱红 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院肿瘤科  
李定宇 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院肿瘤科  
秦亮 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院骨科  
李建军 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院放射科  
熊慧华 430030 武汉华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院肿瘤科 xionghuihua@hotmail.com 
摘要点击次数: 4617
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      目的 探讨案例教学法联合多学科协作的教学模式在骨肿瘤临床教学中的应用效果。方法 选取2015年1月至2016年12月在我院接受住院医师规范化培训的50名学员作为教学对象,根据所在的病区不同分为研究组(22例)和对照组(28例),研究组采用案例教学(case based learning, CBL)联合多学科协作(multidisciplinary teamwork, MDT)的教学模式,对照组采用传统授课式教学(lecture based learing, LBL),通过两组学员的考试成绩和满意度问卷调查比较两种教学方法的教学效果。结果 研究组学员的病例分析成绩和总成绩分别为(19.86±2.27)分和(76.59±5.49)分,对照组分别为(18.39±2.42)分和(71.14±7.05)分,研究组和对照组学员对于培养临床思维的满意度分别为95.45%(21/22)和64.29%(18/28),上述指标的组间比较,差异均有统计学意义(t=2.188,P=0.034;t=2.981,P=0.005;χ2=6.975,P=0.031)。结论 CBL联合MDT的教学模式有利于提高教学质量和培养学生的临床思维。
英文摘要:
      Objective To explore the value of case-based learning (CBL) combined with multidisciplinary teamwork (MDT) in bone tumor clinical teaching. Methods Total of 50 students receiving residency program in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2016 were divided into the experimental group (22 cases) and the control group (28 cases). The experimental group was taught by CBL combined with MDT, and the control group was taught by lecture-based learning (LBL). The teaching effect was evaluated by students' questionnaire survey and the test score. Results The score of case analysis test and total score in the experimental group were 19.86±2.27 and 76.59±5.49 respectively and those in the control group were 18.39±2.42 and 71.14±7.05 respectively, and the students in experimental group were more satisfied with the new teaching method in the training of the clinical thinking (95.45% vs. 64.29%). The results above showed statistically significant difference between the two groups (t=2.188, P=0.034; t=2.981, P=0.005; χ2=6.975, P=0.031). Conclusion The CBL combined with MDT teaching model can make a great contribution to improve the teaching quality and the training of the clinical thinking.
查看全文   下载PDF阅读器
关闭