Harvey

8 downloads 0 Views 38KB Size Report
simulator 'Harvey'. Anshuman Sengupta, Amy J Todd, Stephen J Leslie, Alan Bagnall, Nicholas A Boon, Keith A Fox & Martin A Denvir. Editor ) Patient ...
219

Peer-led medical student tutorials using the cardiac simulator Harvey Anshuman Sengupta, Amy J Todd, Stephen J Leslie, Alan Bagnall, Nicholas A Boon, Keith A Fox & Martin A Denvir

Editor ) Patient simulators such as Harvey are useful for the education and assessment of medical students and doctors.1 Recently, there has been an emphasis on peer-led tutoring in medical schools, which has been shown to be effective.2 Student tutors may also benefit in terms of developing their own understanding, retention of information and communication skills.3 However, there are no published studies evaluating peer-led tutoring using patient simulators. Our pilot study compares the opinions of students who have undergone simulator tutorials led by student tutors and doctors, respectively. This study was performed at the University of Edinburgh. Interactive Harvey tutorials focusing on bedside examination skills and specific cardiac conditions were held for Year 3 medical students (n ¼ 199) between December 2004 and April 2006. These were led either by cardiologists or by senior medical students who had previously undergone a training programme led by a consultant cardiologist. Afterwards, students were asked to indicate their level of agreement with specific statements regarding the utility of the tutorial

and their opinion of the tutor on a 5-point Likert scale. A total of 131 (66%) students were taught in peer-led tutorials and 68 (34%) in doctor-led tutorials. All participating medical students completed feedback forms. The majority of students found the tutorial useful (99%) and the tutor approachable (98%). Most students found the clinical signs were explained in a way that was easy to understand (98%). After the tutorial, most students felt confident about their cardiovascular examination skills (90%) and their core knowledge (95%), and thought that the tutorial would make them more confident when examining patients (82%). Most students (92%) felt confident about using Harvey for self-directed learning. There were no significant differences between the doctor-led and student-led groups in response to the above questions (all P > 0Æ05). When asked: I find it easier to learn when the tutor is a student, the largest proportion of students reported a neutral response. However, more students taught in peerled tutorials agreed or strongly agreed compared with those in doctor-led tutorials (50% versus 11%; P < 0Æ0001).

To our knowledge, this is the first evaluation of peer-led tutoring using Harvey. In agreement with previous research,2 our study suggests that medical students find this an acceptable alternative to traditional doctor-led teaching. Given the increasing constraints on doctors’ teaching time and the expansion in medical student numbers, this is an important finding. Peerled tutoring, if run by well trained students, is likely to be a useful adjunct to traditional teaching methods.

REFERENCES 1

2

3

Cooper JB, Taqueti VR. A brief history of the development of mannequin simulators for clinical education and training. Qual Safety Health Care 2004;13:11–8. Perkins GD, Hulme J, Bion JF. Peerled resuscitation training for healthcare students: a randomised controlled trial. Intensive Care Med 2002;28:698–700. Krych AJ, March CN, Bryan RE, Peake BJ, Pawlina W, Carmichael SW. Reciprocal peer teaching: students teaching students in the gross anatomy laboratory. Clin Anat 2005;18:296–301.

Correspondence: Martin A Denvir, Department of Cardiology, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK. Tel: 00 44 131 537 3834; Fax: 00 44 131 537 1846; E-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02679.x

Ó Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2007. MEDICAL EDUCATION 2007; 41: 218–219

219