摘要
目的对比观察GASMAN软件计算机辅助教学与传统教学在吸入全麻教学中的效果。方法选择48名需要进入麻醉科学习吸入全麻理论的住院医师为研究对象，按随机量表法分成2组，即GASMAN软件计算机辅助教学组和传统方法教学组，每组各24人。住院医师按照所在分组分别采用以上两种方法进行吸入全麻的学习。教学课程结束后，通过书面试题考核和问卷调查对两组学员的学习效果及满意度进行分析。采用SPSS11．5软件进行统计分析。计量资料用x±s表示，考核成绩比较采用独立样本t检验；满意度调查反馈比较采用卡方检验，P〈0．05为差异有统计学意义。结果GASMAN软件计算机辅助教学组学员考核成绩为（95．4±2．7）分，传统方法教学组学员考核成绩为（85．0±3．5）分，两组比较差异有统计学意义（t=11．5，P=-0．000）。满意度调查结果显示，GASMAN软件计算机辅助教学形式让学员更易接受，两组比较差异有统计学意义（P=0．001）。结论GASMAN软件计算机辅助教学更有利于学员学习和掌握吸入全麻技术．值得推广。
Objective To compare and observe the effect of GASMAN software computer aided and traditional teaching method in the teaching of inhalation anesthesia. Methods 48 members of interns who need to enter the inhalation anesthesia department to study the theory of inhalation anesthesia were ran- domly divided into either GASMAN software group or traditional group with 24 people in each group, using the above two methods to carry on the study of inhalation anesthesia. After the end of the teaching course, the study effect and the satisfaction degree of the two groups of students were investigated by the written exam and questionnaire. SPSS 11.5 was used for statistical analysis, using ± s to express measurement data. The results of the examination were compared with the independent sample t test, and the satisfaction survey feedback was compared with chi square test, The difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. Result The mean score of GASMAN software group （95.4±2.7） was significantly higher than that of traditional group （85.0± 3.5） （t=11.5,P=0.000）. Satisfaction survey results showed that GASMAN computer assisted instruction software learning was easier for students to accept, and there were significant difference between two groups （P=0.001）. Conclusion Teaching mode of GASMAN software is a good learning technique of inhalation anesthesia, which is worthy of promotion.
出处
《中华医学教育探索杂志》
2016年第1期55-58,共4页
Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research
