基于执业医师分阶段考试的医学生问诊SP教学与传统教学的效果分析

Effect analysis of medical students' inquiry SP teaching and traditional teaching based on phasedexamination of practicing physicians

目的:通过执业医师分阶段考试成绩,探讨传统教学和标准化病人(standardized patient,SP)教学在医学生问诊教学中的效果。方法:选择青海大学临床医学院临床医学专业2013级1班与2班共计107名学生为对照组、2014级1班与2班共计100名学生为试验组。在问诊教学中对照组采用传统教学法,试验组采用SP教学法。通过执业医师分阶段考试病史采集得分,比较两组教学方法的效果。采用SPSS 18.0进行t检验。结果:试验组成绩中现病史(81.43±8.19)、病史收集(8.19±0.70)、问诊内容(47.63±4.55)、考官总评分(73.75±5.21)、总分(91.93±5.67),分别高于对照组的(71.65±8.29)(7.85±0.68)(43.68±4.76)(69.68±5.40)(88.03±6.01),差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001)。对照组综合表现中交流能力成绩(8.94±0.62)、交流能力中提问表达成绩(4.54±0.44)和沟通技巧成绩(4.52±0.47)分别高于试验组的(8.77±0.60)(4.33±0.54)(4.38±0.46),差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:SP教学整体教学效果优于传统教学,但在具体知识点中有各自优势和不足,将两者有机结合优势互补、助力医学教育,值得进一步探讨。

Objective To explore the effect of traditional teaching and standardized patient(SP)teaching in medical students'inquiry teaching through the phased examination results of practicing physicians.Methods A total of 107 students from Class 1 and Class 2 of Batch 2013 majoring in clinical medicine of Qinghai University were selected as the control group,and 100 students from Class 1 and Class 2 of Batch 2014 were selected as the experimental group.In the inquiry teaching,the control group adopted the traditional teaching method,and the experimental group adopted the SP teaching method.The effect of the two groups of teaching methods was compared by collecting the scores of the medical history of the medical practitioners in the phased examination.SPSS 18.0 was used for t-test.Results The scores of current medical history (81.43±8.19), case collection (8.19±0.70), inquiry content (47.63±4.55), examiner's totalscore (73.75±5.21), and total score (91.93±5.67) in the experimental group were higher than those in thecontrol group [(71.65±8.29) (7.85±0.68) (43.68±4.76) (69.68±5.40) and (88.03±6.01)] and thedifference was statistically significant (P<0.001). The scores of communication ability (8.94±0.62) questionexpression (4.54±0.44) and communication skills (4.52±0.47) in the comprehensive performance of thecontrol group were higher than those in the experimental group [(8.77±0.60) (4.33±0.54) and (4.38±0.46),respectively], and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion The overall teachingeffect of the SP teaching is better than that of the traditional teaching, but it has its own advantages anddisadvantages in specific knowledge points. It is worth further discussion to combine the two to complementthe advantages and complement each other to assist medical education.