TY - JOUR
T1 - What are the benefits of early patient contact? - A comparison of three preclinical patient contact settings
AU - Wenrich, Marjorie D.
AU - Jackson, Molly B.
AU - Wolfhagen, Ineke
AU - Ramsey, Paul G.
AU - Scherpbier, Albert J. J.
PY - 2013/6/3
Y1 - 2013/6/3
N2 - Background: Despite increasing attention to providing preclinical medical students with early patient experiences, little is known about associated outcomes for students. The authors compared three early patient experiences at a large American medical school where all preclinical students complete preceptorships and weekly bedside clinicalskills training and about half complete clinical, community-based summer immersion experiences. The authors asked, what are the relative outcomes and important educational components for students? Methods: Medical students completed surveys at end of second year 2009-2011. In 2009, students compared/contrasted two of three approaches; responses framed later survey questions. In 2010 and 2011, students rated all three experiences in relevant areas (e. g., developing comfort in clinical setting). Investigators performed qualitative and quantitative analyses. Results: Students rated bedside training more highly for developing comfort with clinical settings, one-on-one clinical-skills training, feedback, active clinical experience, quality of clinical training, and learning to be part of a team. They rated community clinical immersion and preceptorships more highly for understanding the life/practice of a physician and career/specialty decisions. Conclusions: Preclinical students received different benefits from the different experiences. Medical schools should define objectives of early clinical experiences and offer options accordingly. A combination of experiences may help students achieve clinical and team comfort, clinical skills, an understanding of physicians' lives/practices, and broad exposure for career decisions.
AB - Background: Despite increasing attention to providing preclinical medical students with early patient experiences, little is known about associated outcomes for students. The authors compared three early patient experiences at a large American medical school where all preclinical students complete preceptorships and weekly bedside clinicalskills training and about half complete clinical, community-based summer immersion experiences. The authors asked, what are the relative outcomes and important educational components for students? Methods: Medical students completed surveys at end of second year 2009-2011. In 2009, students compared/contrasted two of three approaches; responses framed later survey questions. In 2010 and 2011, students rated all three experiences in relevant areas (e. g., developing comfort in clinical setting). Investigators performed qualitative and quantitative analyses. Results: Students rated bedside training more highly for developing comfort with clinical settings, one-on-one clinical-skills training, feedback, active clinical experience, quality of clinical training, and learning to be part of a team. They rated community clinical immersion and preceptorships more highly for understanding the life/practice of a physician and career/specialty decisions. Conclusions: Preclinical students received different benefits from the different experiences. Medical schools should define objectives of early clinical experiences and offer options accordingly. A combination of experiences may help students achieve clinical and team comfort, clinical skills, an understanding of physicians' lives/practices, and broad exposure for career decisions.
U2 - 10.1186/1472-6920-13-80
DO - 10.1186/1472-6920-13-80
M3 - Article
C2 - 23731514
SN - 1472-6920
VL - 13
JO - BMC Medical Education
JF - BMC Medical Education
IS - 1
M1 - 80
ER -