Azcoitia MF, Martínez FC, Moya GVI, Díaz VCV, Galicia AJV, González RJM

Language: Spanish
References: 28
Page: 26-33
PDF size: 99.45 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To describe and assess the use of multimedia and internet tools in a course on Surgical Techniques based on mediated-learning experiences.
Design: A study on undergraduate surgical education, with a descriptive, correlational, prospective and longitudinal design.
Setting: School of Medicine at the Anahuac University.
Material and methods: We elaborated and implemented the contents for a third generation Surgical Techniques course for the period July to December 2006. An initial training workshop was given. Two partial and one final written evaluations were applied. A final integrating grading score (FIGS) was given covering all the activities performed. Total accesses per student per areas of study, all performed searches, and the allotted time were computed. The course is based on the presence of the student supported by multimedia, communication and information tools that allow for the planning, design, execution, administration of the course and assessment of students as well as to attain feedback on the course. Statistical analysis was performed with the EPIInfo v. 3.3. software.
Results: Thirty-three students were included, mean age of 20.5 years; 36 sessions were given. We recorded 112.6 accesses per student. The most used pages were those dealing with organization and contents. The mean score of the first evaluation was 7.2. Students above this mean score had the highest number of accesses. The same effect was observed with the FIGS. There was a statistical significance between the number of accesses and the first written evaluation (p £ 0.005), between the number of total accesses and FIGS (p = 0.004), and between the review of contents and FIGS (p = 0.05).
Conclusion: The third generation students served to assess the impact of the information and communication tools on the process of teaching how to learn. It was demonstrated that the students with the highest evaluation scores were also those that used the multimedia technology the most.

REFERENCES

1. e-Learning Action Plan. http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/education_culture/index_en.htm

2. McKimm J, Jollie C, Cantillon P. ABC of learning and teaching. Web based learning. BMJ 2003; 326: 870-873.

3. Walsh K. M-Learning. BMJ 2005; 330: 1072.

4. Walsh K. Blended Learning. BMJ 2005; 330: 829.

5. Klass DJ. Will e-learning improve clinical judgment? BMJ 2004; 328: 1147-48.

6. Libro Blanco sobre la educación y la formación. Enseñar y aprender. Hacia la sociedad cognitiva. Bruselas, Bélgica. Comisión de las Comunidades Europeas, 1995.

7. World Federation for Medical Education. Basic Medical Education. WFME Global Standards for Quality Improvement. Denmark, 2003.

8. Manual del estudiante WebCT Campus Edition 4.1 Coordinación de Tecnologías para la educación. Cursos @prende. Universidad Anáhuac 2006.

9. Tessaring M, Wannan J. Vocational education and training -key to the future. Lisbon-Copenhagen-Maastricht: mobilizing for 2010. Cedefop synthesis of the Maastricht Study. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004.

10. Decisión 1720/2006/CE Del Parlamento Europeo y Del Consejo. Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea. Estrasburgo, 15 de noviembre de 2006.

11. World Federation for Medical Education. Continuing Professional Development of Medical Doctors. WFME Global Standards for Quality Improvement. Denmark, 2003.

12. Cubero R, Luque A. Desarrollo, educación y educación escolar: la teoría sociocultural del desarrollo y del aprendizaje. En: Coll C, Palacios J y Marchesi A. Desarrollo psicológico y educación. 2. Psicología de la educación escolar. 2ª ed; Madrid, España. Alianza editorial, 2002: 139-152.

13. Desarrollo cognitivo. En: Sprinthall NA; Sprinthall RC and Oja SN. Psicología de la educación. 6a ed. Madrid, España. McGraw-Hill Interamericana, 1996: 91-102.

14. Azcoitia-Moraila F, Farías-Suárez JA. Experiencia de enseñanza-aprendizaje de cirugía laparoscópica en estudiantes de medicina de pregrado. Cir Gen 2001; 23: 139-144.

15. Barratt H. Virtual universities. BMJ 2001; 323: 580.

16. Barzansky B, Etzel S. Educational Programs in US Medical Schools, 2004-2005. JAMA 2005; 294: 1068-1074.

17. Bowen JL. Educational strategies to promote clinical diagnostic reasoning. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2217-2225.

18. Davis DA, Mazmanian PE, Fordis M, Van Harrison R, Thorpe KE, Perrier L. Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence: a systematic review. JAMA 2006; 296: 1094-1102.

19. Farrow R. ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: Creating teaching materials. BMJ 2003; 326: 921-923.

20. Gold J, Begg WB, Fullerton D, Mathisen D, Olinger G, Orringer M, et al. Successful implementation of a novel internet hybrid surgery curriculum: the early phase outcome of thoracic surgery prerequisite curriculum e-learning project. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 499-509.

21. Hammoud M, Gruppen L, Erickson SS, Cox SM, Espey E, Goepfert A, et al. To the Point: reviews in medical education online computer assisted instruction materials. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 194: 1064-1069.

22. Kaufman DM. Applying educational theory in practice. BMJ 2003; 326: 213-216.

23. Kondro W. Eleven satellite campuses enter orbit of Canadian medical education. Can Med Assoc J 2006: 175: 461.

24. Lipman AJ, Sade RM, Glotzbach AL, Lancaster CJ, Marshall MF. The incremental value of internet-based instruction as an adjunct to classroom instruction: a prospective randomized study. Acad Med 2001; 76: 1060-1064.

25. McCloy R, Stone R. Science, medicine, and the future. Virtual reality in surgery. BMJ 2001; 323: 912-915.

26. Schwartz RW, Donnelly MB, Young B, Nash PP, Witte FM, Griffen WO Jr. Undergraduate surgical education for the twenty-first century. Ann Surg 1992; 216: 639-647.

27. Seabra D, Srougi M, Baptista R, Nesrallah LJ, Ortiz V, Sigulem D. Computer aided learning versus standard lecture for undergraduate education in urology. J Urol 2004; 171: 1220-1222.

28. Wallace G. Information technology and telemedicine. Can Med Assoc J 2001; 165: 777-779.