全科医学临-住项目研究生培养教学基地师资培训的效果评价及影响

Evaluation of the effect of teacher training for students combining postgraduate education of specialized master degree of the general practitioners with resident standardization training

目的对临-住项目全科医学研究生培养基地师资情况进行调查和分析,并对社区教学基地的师资进行按需培训的效果进行评价。方法自2014年10月—2015年9月,在上海交大医学院附属第九人民医院全科医学教研室带教老师(n=32),以及所属全科社区教学基地的带教老师(n=32)中,采用自制调查问卷的方法获得师资总体情况,开展针对性的临床技能培训和教学培训,分别由带教老师和全科医学临-住项目研究生进行培训前后的评价,确定培训效果。结果 1临床教学基地的师资均为专科医师,取得全科医学师资培训证书的比例明显低于社区教学基地(50.00%vs.87.50%,P<0.01),而社区基地的师资在学历及专业职称上明显低于临床基地师资。2临床教学基地老师较社区基地老师更希望加强全科理论学习;而社区教学基地师资则更需要技能操作培训以及带教方法的培训。3社区教学基地师资在进行技能和教学能力培训后临床技能(57.75±7.99 vs.50.50±9.19,P<0.05)及教学能力显著上升(88.40±3.47 vs.83.20±3.93,P<0.05),带教方法(28.10±1.28vs.26.10±1.91,P<0.05)和全科理念(11.70±1.33 vs.10.20±1.39,P<0.05)也得到了明显的进步。而教学态度和教学内容的评分在培训前后无明显差异。结论临床基地和社区基地的带教老师所需求的培训内容有各自特点,临床基地和社区基地的师资培训应该实行按需培养。针对社区基地师资需求所进行的培训可以有效提高带教老师的临床技能和带教水平。

Objective To investigate the situations of teachers＇ qualifications for students combining postgraduate education of specialized master degree of the general practitioners with resident standardization training, and evaluate the effect of teacher training on demand in the general practitioners community practicing training base. Methods From October 2014 to September 2015, a self-made questionnaire was investigated in teachers （ n = 32） that in the general medicine department of the Ninth People＇ s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University Medical College and teachers （ n = 32 ） belongs to a community teaching base to get the overall situation in these two group of teachers. The clinical skills training and teaching training were carried out in these teachers respectively. The training effects were evaluated by the teachers themselves and the combining postgraduate students of the resident standardization training base. Results （1）The teachers of clinical teaching base were all special doctors, and the proportion of the general medical teacher training certificate was significantly lower than that of the community teaching base （50.00% vs. 87.50%, P 〈 0. 01 ） ; while the educational ground and professional titles of the teachers in community base was significantly lower than those in clinical base. （2）Teachers in clinical base mostly wanted to strengthen the general theory of learning; while the community base teachers needed more skills training and teaching methods of training. （3）After skills and teaching training, the teachers in community base were great improved in chnical skills and teaching abilities （57.75 ± 7.99 vs. 50.50 ± 9.19, P 〈 0.05 and 88.40 ±3.47 vs. 83.20 ± 3.93, P 〈 0. 05, respectively）, as well as the teaching methods and general medical ideas （28.10 ± 1.28 vs. 26.10 ± 1.91, P 〈0. 05 and 11.70 ± 1.33 vs. 10.20 ± 1.39,P 〈 0.05, respectively）. There was no significant difference in teaching attitude and teaching content before and after the training. Conclusion There was difference in the demand for the training between the teachers from the clinical bases and from the community teaching bases, thus the training should be provided on the demand. The training aims at the teachers from the community teaching bases can obviously their clinical skills and teaching ability.