Student selected components as an educational platform for teaching medical students about clinical pharmacology and quality improvement activities

Student selected components (SSCs) are increasingly described elements of medical undergraduate education, training and curricula. SSCs offer the potential for integration into both traditional (‘pre-clinical’ versus ‘clinical’) medical curricula, as well as into other innovative or evolving medical training curricula. This article employs a structured and descriptive approach to exemplify the process by which year 1 medical students were supported in a practical manner to undertake a distinct small group SSC project. In this illustration, the SSC was focused on a quality improvement (QI) topic of relevance to clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT), and involved a review of the anticholinergic burden of inpatient prescriptions for a defined cohort. The SSC was completed in the context of a teaching hospital’s medicine of the elderly (MoE) clinical service. In a sequential manner, the paper describes experiential learning points from the perspective of a supervisor of an SSC project. The paper offers educational value with a potential for generalisable application to non-clinical and clinical educationalists. Furthermore, the paper offers guidance to supervisors, teachers, tutors and facilitators, with encouragement to consider how they may design similar projects for the training of undergraduate medical students in centres that they are affiliated with. The paper also highlights another key driver for productive SSCs i.e. the central principle of striving to promote projects and activities that support active student engagement, rather than merely passive inclusion.

The Impact of the Fidelity of Simulation on Medical Undergraduate Education: A Meta-Analysis

Background: With the development of science and technology, simulation-based education has also developed rapidly. However, whether the fidelity level of simulators has a positive correlation with medical students' learning outcomes is controversial. This study aims to compare the theoretical knowledge, skill performance and confidence of undergraduate medical students through meta-analysis according to the fidelity level of the simulator.Methods: Two researchers independently searched the PubMed database, the Cochrane Library, and the Embase database through October 20, 2020, to retrieve articles on the differences in effectiveness between high-fidelity simulators and low-fidelity simulators in undergraduate medical education. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate all included literature. Quantitative meta-analysis of the included literature was performed with Review Manager 5.3.Results: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, 11 of which were meta-analysed. Meta-analysis showed whether there were differences in students’ theoretical knowledge [standardized mean difference -0.51; 95% CI -1.30～0.29，P=0.21], skill performance [standardized mean difference -0.26; 95% CI -0.87～0.35, P = 0.40], and confidence [standardized mean difference 2.53; 95% CI -1.05～6.10, P = 0.17]: there were no significant differences between high-fidelity simulators and low-fidelity simulators.Conclusions: In medical undergraduate education, students who experience low-fidelity simulator training are not inferior to students who learn from high-fidelity simulators in their theoretical knowledge, skill performance, or confidence.

End of Paediatric Posting Assessment of Medical Interns at a Teaching hospital from Coastal Karnataka

Introduction: Internship is very a critical period of a medical undergraduate education during which student evolves into a doctor. The objectives of this study were to assess the interns at the end of their paediatric postings. Materials and Methods. Interns knowledge and skills were assessed at the end of their postings in the must know areas. Assessment was conducted by the trained faculty and interns were given the orientation about it. Method of assessment included OSCE, simulation based using standardized patients and computer-based model driven simulators. Feedback was given to the students immediately at the end of their exam Results: Total 202 interns participated in the exam over the period of two years. New-borns assessment was done more frequently (22.7%) and interpretation of investigations was less frequently assessed (7.9%). Rest of other stations was assessed almost at the equal proportion. Highest score was observed in vaccines section (7.5) and lowest score was seen in procedures assessment (5.5). Conclusion. Interns were found to be weaker in procedural, communication and clinical scenario judgement skills which will help us in planning future training of the Interns.