An Observational Study of 3 Different Transfusion Medicine Teaching Methods for Medical Students

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Knowledge deficits of transfusion medicine are prevalent among learners and practicing physicians. In the past, the transfusion medicine community has thoughtfully defined the content of transfusion medicine curriculums through Transfusion Medicine Academic Award Group and The Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists. The manner in which the curriculum should be delivered has been less carefully examined and defined. We completed an observational study in which we analyzed 3 different teaching techniques: in-person faculty-led simulation curriculum consisting of didactic session and simulation (“Simulation group”); hybrid education with a combination of online materials and short in-person simulation (“Hybrid group”); and online-only education module, which delivered the whole curricular content through a variety of online materials and videos (“Online-only group”). Knowledge acquisition was assessed with a 10-question multiple-choice questionnaire, and satisfaction was assessed by a 9-question online student satisfaction survey. A total of 276 second-year medical students participated in the study. There was statistically significant difference between pre- and posttest results and in knowledge gain favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Online-only group (P =.03, P <.0001) and favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Hybrid group (P =.004, P <.0001). The Simulation group and Hybrid group medical students were also more satisfied with the education activity as compared with the Online-only group (P <.0001, P <.001). Our study demonstrated that a faculty-run transfusion medicine simulation curriculum consisting of an in-person didactic session and simulation session for the second-year medical students produced greater immediate knowledge acquisition compared with an online only or a hybrid curriculum. Furthermore, any curriculum that contained in-person teaching by faculty was preferred over the online only education.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)117-122
Number of pages6
JournalTransfusion Medicine Reviews
Volume32
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2018

Fingerprint

Transfusion Medicine
Medical Students
Curriculum
Curricula
Medicine
Observational Studies
Teaching
Students
Education
Knowledge acquisition
Medical Laboratory Personnel
Clinical laboratories
Physicians
Lead

Keywords

  • Education
  • Hybrid education
  • In-person faculty teaching
  • Online education
  • Simulation
  • Transfusion medicine

PubMed: MeSH publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Journal Article
  • Observational Study

Cite this

An Observational Study of 3 Different Transfusion Medicine Teaching Methods for Medical Students. / Konia, Mojca R; Richtsfeld, Martina; Johnson, Andrew D; Lougee, Michael; Cohn, Claudia S; Morgan, Shanna M.

In: Transfusion Medicine Reviews, Vol. 32, No. 2, 04.2018, p. 117-122.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{03161366aa63471aadf8cd330dddfc22,
title = "An Observational Study of 3 Different Transfusion Medicine Teaching Methods for Medical Students",
abstract = "Knowledge deficits of transfusion medicine are prevalent among learners and practicing physicians. In the past, the transfusion medicine community has thoughtfully defined the content of transfusion medicine curriculums through Transfusion Medicine Academic Award Group and The Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists. The manner in which the curriculum should be delivered has been less carefully examined and defined. We completed an observational study in which we analyzed 3 different teaching techniques: in-person faculty-led simulation curriculum consisting of didactic session and simulation (“Simulation group”); hybrid education with a combination of online materials and short in-person simulation (“Hybrid group”); and online-only education module, which delivered the whole curricular content through a variety of online materials and videos (“Online-only group”). Knowledge acquisition was assessed with a 10-question multiple-choice questionnaire, and satisfaction was assessed by a 9-question online student satisfaction survey. A total of 276 second-year medical students participated in the study. There was statistically significant difference between pre- and posttest results and in knowledge gain favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Online-only group (P =.03, P <.0001) and favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Hybrid group (P =.004, P <.0001). The Simulation group and Hybrid group medical students were also more satisfied with the education activity as compared with the Online-only group (P <.0001, P <.001). Our study demonstrated that a faculty-run transfusion medicine simulation curriculum consisting of an in-person didactic session and simulation session for the second-year medical students produced greater immediate knowledge acquisition compared with an online only or a hybrid curriculum. Furthermore, any curriculum that contained in-person teaching by faculty was preferred over the online only education.",
keywords = "Education, Hybrid education, In-person faculty teaching, Online education, Simulation, Transfusion medicine",
author = "Konia, {Mojca R} and Martina Richtsfeld and Johnson, {Andrew D} and Michael Lougee and Cohn, {Claudia S} and Morgan, {Shanna M}",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.tmrv.2017.12.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "117--122",
journal = "Transfusion Medicine Reviews",
issn = "0887-7963",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An Observational Study of 3 Different Transfusion Medicine Teaching Methods for Medical Students

AU - Konia, Mojca R

AU - Richtsfeld, Martina

AU - Johnson, Andrew D

AU - Lougee, Michael

AU - Cohn, Claudia S

AU - Morgan, Shanna M

PY - 2018/4

Y1 - 2018/4

N2 - Knowledge deficits of transfusion medicine are prevalent among learners and practicing physicians. In the past, the transfusion medicine community has thoughtfully defined the content of transfusion medicine curriculums through Transfusion Medicine Academic Award Group and The Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists. The manner in which the curriculum should be delivered has been less carefully examined and defined. We completed an observational study in which we analyzed 3 different teaching techniques: in-person faculty-led simulation curriculum consisting of didactic session and simulation (“Simulation group”); hybrid education with a combination of online materials and short in-person simulation (“Hybrid group”); and online-only education module, which delivered the whole curricular content through a variety of online materials and videos (“Online-only group”). Knowledge acquisition was assessed with a 10-question multiple-choice questionnaire, and satisfaction was assessed by a 9-question online student satisfaction survey. A total of 276 second-year medical students participated in the study. There was statistically significant difference between pre- and posttest results and in knowledge gain favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Online-only group (P =.03, P <.0001) and favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Hybrid group (P =.004, P <.0001). The Simulation group and Hybrid group medical students were also more satisfied with the education activity as compared with the Online-only group (P <.0001, P <.001). Our study demonstrated that a faculty-run transfusion medicine simulation curriculum consisting of an in-person didactic session and simulation session for the second-year medical students produced greater immediate knowledge acquisition compared with an online only or a hybrid curriculum. Furthermore, any curriculum that contained in-person teaching by faculty was preferred over the online only education.

AB - Knowledge deficits of transfusion medicine are prevalent among learners and practicing physicians. In the past, the transfusion medicine community has thoughtfully defined the content of transfusion medicine curriculums through Transfusion Medicine Academic Award Group and The Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists. The manner in which the curriculum should be delivered has been less carefully examined and defined. We completed an observational study in which we analyzed 3 different teaching techniques: in-person faculty-led simulation curriculum consisting of didactic session and simulation (“Simulation group”); hybrid education with a combination of online materials and short in-person simulation (“Hybrid group”); and online-only education module, which delivered the whole curricular content through a variety of online materials and videos (“Online-only group”). Knowledge acquisition was assessed with a 10-question multiple-choice questionnaire, and satisfaction was assessed by a 9-question online student satisfaction survey. A total of 276 second-year medical students participated in the study. There was statistically significant difference between pre- and posttest results and in knowledge gain favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Online-only group (P =.03, P <.0001) and favoring the Simulation group as compared with the Hybrid group (P =.004, P <.0001). The Simulation group and Hybrid group medical students were also more satisfied with the education activity as compared with the Online-only group (P <.0001, P <.001). Our study demonstrated that a faculty-run transfusion medicine simulation curriculum consisting of an in-person didactic session and simulation session for the second-year medical students produced greater immediate knowledge acquisition compared with an online only or a hybrid curriculum. Furthermore, any curriculum that contained in-person teaching by faculty was preferred over the online only education.

KW - Education

KW - Hybrid education

KW - In-person faculty teaching

KW - Online education

KW - Simulation

KW - Transfusion medicine

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85040688424&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85040688424&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.tmrv.2017.12.001

DO - 10.1016/j.tmrv.2017.12.001

M3 - Review article

C2 - 29395602

AN - SCOPUS:85040688424

VL - 32

SP - 117

EP - 122

JO - Transfusion Medicine Reviews

JF - Transfusion Medicine Reviews

SN - 0887-7963

IS - 2

ER -