1. Practical exploration of BOPPPS model combined with situational teaching method in clinical training of intensive medicine: novel pedagogy and perception
- Author
-
Yanquan Liu, Xiaolan Lian, Xiaojun Chen, Minjuan Zeng, Yue Yin, and Jie Lin
- Subjects
BOPPPS ,teaching model ,situational teaching method ,ICU ,clinical training ,pedagogy ,Medicine (General) ,R5-920 - Abstract
ObjectiveTo explore the application value of bridge-in, learning objective, pre-assessment, participatory learning, post-assessment, and summary (BOPPPS) model combined with situational teaching method in the clinical teaching of intensive care unit (ICU), and to provide experience for the reform of ICU clinical teaching and standardized training of intensive medicine.MethodsA randomized trial was conducted using a multi-center, prospective cohort study. A total of 293 residential physicians in ICU of Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, the Affiliated Hospital of Putian University and the First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University from January 2021 to December 2023 were selected as subjects, and the residential physicians in ICU in each medical center were divided into control group and experimental group using random number table method. The control group adopted bedside teaching and demonstration teaching method, and the experimental group adopted BOPPPS model combined with situational teaching method. Clinical teaching performance was evaluated by ICU admission examination, and study process questionnaire (SPQ) and the critical thinking disposition inventory-Chinese version (CTDI-CV) was used to evaluate the learning motivation and critical thinking ability of the two groups. At the same time, the effect evaluation and satisfaction questionnaire of ICU training (EESQ) was used to evaluate the teaching satisfaction.ResultsThe scores of the experimental group in ICU theoretical knowledge, clinical thinking and skills, and the treatment of clinical critical cases were higher than those of the control group [(87.31 ± 13.15), (92.86 ± 12.35), (81.45 ± 11.28)] vs. [(83.94 ± 12.73), (88.37 ± 12.61), (78.83 ± 10.47)], the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF