可视喉镜与普通喉镜联合教学在麻醉本科实习中的教学效果研究

Effect of combined teaching of optical laryngoscope and general laryngoscope on anesthesia undergraduate practice

目的评价运用可视喉镜与普通喉镜联合教学在麻醉本科实习中的教学效果。方法将40名麻醉本科实习学生随机分为A组(第一个月仅用可视喉镜,第二个月仅用普通喉镜,n=20)和B组(第一个月仅用普通喉镜,第二个月仅用可视喉镜,n=20)。通过气管插管考核与问卷调查结果评价教学效果。用SPSS 23.0软件进行t检验和卡方检验。结果①第一个月,气管插管一次成功率A组为90%,B组为60%,B组的成功率低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);气管插管所需时间A组为(61.8±5.0)s,B组为(83.0±4.9)s,B组所需的时间长,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);并发症A组为5%,B组为14%,B组的并发症例数多,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。②第二个月,气管插管一次成功率、气管插管所需时间、并发症,两组之间差异无统计学意义。组内比较,一次成功率及并发症,差异均无统计学意义;两组均显示普通喉镜插管所需时间长,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。100%的学生认为用可视喉镜教学有好处,提高了学习兴趣,两种方式结合的方式更好。结论先用可视喉镜再用普通喉镜教学,更有利于学生掌握气管插管,提高成功率,减少并发症,培养自信。

Objective To evaluate the effect of combined teaching of optical laryngoscope and general laryngoscope on anesthesia undergraduate practice. Methods A total of 40 anesthesia undergraduate students were randomly divided into group A (using the optical laryngocope only in the first month and the general laryngoscope only in the second month, n=20), and group B (using the general laryngocope only in the first month and the optical laryngoscope only in the second month, n=20). The teaching effect was evaluated through the first month and the second month of tracheal intubation assessment and questionnaire survey results. SPSS 23.0 was used for t test and chi-square test. Results In the first month, the success rate was 90% in group A and 60% in group B, which showed that the success rate of group B was lower, with significant differences (P < 0.05). The time for tracheal intubation in group A was (61.8±5.0) s, and that in the group B was (83.0±4.9) s, showing that the time of group B was longer, with significant differences (P < 0.05). The complications in group A was 5%, and that in group B was 14%, showing that the group B had more cases of implications, with significant differences (P < 0.05). In the second month, there was no significant difference in the one-time success rate, the time for tracheal intubation, and complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in one-time success rate and complications between groups. Both groups showed that the time for general laryngoscope intubation was longer, with significant differences (P < 0.05). All of the students believed that applying optical laryngoscope teaching was beneficial and could enhance the interest of learning, and the combination of the two methods was better. Conclusion Using the optical laryngoscope first and then the general laryngoscope teaching is more beneficial for students to master the two methods of tracheal intubation, improve the success rate, reduce complications, and cultivates their self-confidence.