Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2022
Preparing for obstetric anaesthesia-An educational randomised controlled trial comparing e-learning to written course material.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Andersson Mette Legaard, Duch Patricia, Bessmann Ebbe Lahn, Lundstrøm Lars Hyldborg, Ekelund Kim
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: E-learning is increasingly used in postgraduate medical education. Its numerous benefits include an enhanced learning experience through learning style individualisation, interactive elements, and assessment through tests and quizzes. Current meta-analyses conclude that the overall effectiveness of e-learning is comparable to traditional teaching modalities. However, studies demonstrating its benefits are heterogeneous and of varying quality. This randomised controlled trial aims to investigate whether contemporary e-learning completed prior to a course in obstetric anaesthesia prepares the course participants better than self-study of written course material.
METHODS: A randomised controlled trial allocated second-year resident anaesthetists to receive either e-learning in postpartum haemorrhage and written course material in preeclampsia or e-learning in preeclampsia and written course material in postpartum haemorrhage, prior to a compulsory course in obstetric anaesthesia. The primary outcome was knowledge after completion of e-learning before the course, assessed by type X multiple-choice questions with a score ranging from zero to 35. The secondary outcomes were anxiety level before course simulations, performance during course simulations, and knowledge four and 12 weeks after the course.
RESULTS: The per protocol analysis of the primary outcome included 45 participants and demonstrated a mean difference of 1.8 (95% CI 0.7-2.9; p = .002) in knowledge after completion of e-learning before the course, in favour of e-learning compared to written course material. There were no statistically significant differences in the secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This blinded parallel group randomised controlled trial found a numerically small but statistically significant difference in knowledge favouring e-learning over written course material.
METHODS: A randomised controlled trial allocated second-year resident anaesthetists to receive either e-learning in postpartum haemorrhage and written course material in preeclampsia or e-learning in preeclampsia and written course material in postpartum haemorrhage, prior to a compulsory course in obstetric anaesthesia. The primary outcome was knowledge after completion of e-learning before the course, assessed by type X multiple-choice questions with a score ranging from zero to 35. The secondary outcomes were anxiety level before course simulations, performance during course simulations, and knowledge four and 12 weeks after the course.
RESULTS: The per protocol analysis of the primary outcome included 45 participants and demonstrated a mean difference of 1.8 (95% CI 0.7-2.9; p = .002) in knowledge after completion of e-learning before the course, in favour of e-learning compared to written course material. There were no statistically significant differences in the secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This blinded parallel group randomised controlled trial found a numerically small but statistically significant difference in knowledge favouring e-learning over written course material.