Difference between revisions of "Journal:Evaluating the effectiveness of a new student-centred laboratory training strategy in clinical biochemistry teaching"

From LIMSWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created stub. Saving and adding more.)
 
(Saving and adding more.)
Line 38: Line 38:


==Introduction==
==Introduction==
Clinical [[biochemistry]] is a pivotal division of the modern [[Clinical laboratory|medical laboratory]]. According to the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC), [[clinical chemistry]] is responsible for applying chemical, molecular, and cellular strategies and techniques to better understand and assess human health and disease processes. It ultimately affects the process of treatment as well as the [[Quality (business)|quality]] of medical outcomes. [1] It has been reported that the results of [[laboratory]] tests influence 70 percent of [[Medical diagnosis|medical diagnoses]], guide approximately 70 percent of clinical decisions, and facilitate the provision of optimal patient care. [2, 3]
Practical training plays a crucial role in clinical biochemistry curriculum. The goal of the course is to enable students to remember the test procedure and understand the underlying principles and medical significance, especially to ensure the accuracy of the test results. However, in traditional teaching, emphasis on [[quality control]] (QC) during the analytical process has received more attention, while neglecting elements of QC during the pre-analytical and post-analytical processes in the experimental courses of clinical biochemistry teaching. In fact, the error-proneness in the analytical process is lower than that in pre- and post-analytical processes of the total testing process (TTP). [4] Moreover, awareness of and ability to use quality management practices are much more important for students. The [[International Organization for Standardization]]'s (ISO's) [[ISO 15189]] ''Medical laboratories — Requirements for quality and competence'' was first published by the ISO's Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems technical committee (ISO/TC 212) in 2003. After several revisions, it has become an important international gold standard in medical laboratory proficiency, cultivating strong elements of laboratory quality management while addressing the processes and procedures that should be used throughout the TTP. [5, 6] As such, there is strong value in acclimating students to the concepts of quality management by applying the ISO 15189 standard to clinical biochemistry classwork.
Traditional training models such as lecture-based learning (LBL) have several features, including a teacher-centered tiered process, a focus on knowledge acquisition, and a final summative assessment at the end of courses. This is indeed the most cost-effective way to carry out theoretical education. [7] As such, several teaching modes are obviously superior to traditional teaching in the course of clinical biochemistry, such as traditional teaching combined with group discussion, peer debriefing approaches, and team learning. [8,9,10] However, small groups and case-based learning (CBL) are likely to dominate medical education. CBL is a learner-centered special type of problem-based learning (PBL) that guides students’ learning and exploration through cases. It has been elucidated that CBL can improve the performance and clinical skills of medical students [11]; help convey an understanding of key concepts [12]; improve clinical practice, problem-solving, case analysis, and the link between theory and practice [13,14,15]; and motivate students to learn more deeply [16], with better student satisfaction. [17] It is hypothesized that students who participate in CBL gain deeper and longer lasting knowledge than those who do not. [18] Compared with traditional methods, the application of practical knowledge (Objective Structure Clinic Examination, OSCE scores) through CBL is significantly improved. [19]
A limitation of this approach is that multiple faculty facilitators may be needed. However, during the [[COVID-19]] [[pandemic]], virtual teaching workshops emerged as an easy and straightforward way to implant a more interactive format into virtual case teaching for health professions [20]. That being said, there is yet to appear a proper teaching model that focuses on improving the entire quality management process dictated by ISO 15189 in clinical biochemistry courses.
Here, we designed a new student-centered training program based on CBL in the experimental teaching of a clinical biochemistry course, with the goal of improving the awareness of and ability to use quality management practices by students majoring in medical laboratory science.
==Methods==
===Participant===





Revision as of 22:08, 2 October 2023

Full article title Evaluating the effectiveness of a new student-centred laboratory training strategy in clinical biochemistry teaching
Journal BMC Medical Education
Author(s) Xu, Guoying; Zhao, Chuanxiang; Yan, Mengdan; Zhang, Xiaoxian; Zhu, Ling; Liu, Jiaxiu; Zhao, Yaping; Zhang, Yuling; Cai, Weili; Xie, Hongxiang; Jiang, Yuzhang; Shao, Qixiang
Author affiliation(s) Jiangsu College of Nursing, Youyang Medical Laboratory Co., Hangzhou Medical College, Nanjing Medical University
Primary contact Email: shao underscore qx at jscn dot edu dot cn
Year published 2023
Volume and issue 23
Article # 391
DOI 10.1186/s12909-023-04272-7
ISSN 1472-6920
Distribution license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Website https://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12909-023-04272-7
Download https://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12909-023-04272-7.pdf (PDF)

Abstract

Background: The error-proneness in the pre-analytical and post-analytical stages is higher than that in the analytical stage of the total laboratory testing process. However, pre-analytical and post-analytical quality management has not received enough attention in medical laboratory education and tests in clinical biochemistry courses.

Methods/approach: Clinical biochemistry teaching programs aim to improve students’ awareness of and ability to use quality management practices according to the International Organization for Standardization's ISO 15189 requirements. We designed a student-centered laboratory training program according to case-based learning that included four stages: establish an overall testing process based on the patient’s clinical indicators, clarify principles, improve operational skills, and review processes and continuous improvement opportunities. The program was implemented in our college during the winter semesters of 2019 and 2020. A total of 185 undergraduate students majoring in medical laboratory science participated in the program as a test group, and the other 172 students were set up as the control group and adopted the conventional method. The participants were asked to finish an online survey to evaluate the class at the end.

Results/outcomes: The test group had significantly better examination scores not only in experimental operational skills (89.27 ± 7.16 vs. 77.51 ± 4.72, p < 0.05 in 2019 grade, 90.31 ± 5.35 vs. 72.87 ± 8.41 in 2020 grade) but also in total examination (83.47 ± 6.16 vs. 68.90 ± 5.86 in 2019 grade, 82.42 ± 5.72 vs. 69.55 ± 7.54 in 2020 grade) than the control group. The results of the questionnaire survey revealed that the students in the test group better achieved classroom goals than those in the control group (all p < 0.05).

Conclusions: The new student-centered laboratory training program based on case-based learning in clinical biochemistry is an effective and acceptable strategy compared with the conventional training program.

Keywords: case-based learning, clinical biochemistry, laboratory training, quality management, student-centered

Introduction

Clinical biochemistry is a pivotal division of the modern medical laboratory. According to the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC), clinical chemistry is responsible for applying chemical, molecular, and cellular strategies and techniques to better understand and assess human health and disease processes. It ultimately affects the process of treatment as well as the quality of medical outcomes. [1] It has been reported that the results of laboratory tests influence 70 percent of medical diagnoses, guide approximately 70 percent of clinical decisions, and facilitate the provision of optimal patient care. [2, 3]

Practical training plays a crucial role in clinical biochemistry curriculum. The goal of the course is to enable students to remember the test procedure and understand the underlying principles and medical significance, especially to ensure the accuracy of the test results. However, in traditional teaching, emphasis on quality control (QC) during the analytical process has received more attention, while neglecting elements of QC during the pre-analytical and post-analytical processes in the experimental courses of clinical biochemistry teaching. In fact, the error-proneness in the analytical process is lower than that in pre- and post-analytical processes of the total testing process (TTP). [4] Moreover, awareness of and ability to use quality management practices are much more important for students. The International Organization for Standardization's (ISO's) ISO 15189 Medical laboratories — Requirements for quality and competence was first published by the ISO's Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems technical committee (ISO/TC 212) in 2003. After several revisions, it has become an important international gold standard in medical laboratory proficiency, cultivating strong elements of laboratory quality management while addressing the processes and procedures that should be used throughout the TTP. [5, 6] As such, there is strong value in acclimating students to the concepts of quality management by applying the ISO 15189 standard to clinical biochemistry classwork.

Traditional training models such as lecture-based learning (LBL) have several features, including a teacher-centered tiered process, a focus on knowledge acquisition, and a final summative assessment at the end of courses. This is indeed the most cost-effective way to carry out theoretical education. [7] As such, several teaching modes are obviously superior to traditional teaching in the course of clinical biochemistry, such as traditional teaching combined with group discussion, peer debriefing approaches, and team learning. [8,9,10] However, small groups and case-based learning (CBL) are likely to dominate medical education. CBL is a learner-centered special type of problem-based learning (PBL) that guides students’ learning and exploration through cases. It has been elucidated that CBL can improve the performance and clinical skills of medical students [11]; help convey an understanding of key concepts [12]; improve clinical practice, problem-solving, case analysis, and the link between theory and practice [13,14,15]; and motivate students to learn more deeply [16], with better student satisfaction. [17] It is hypothesized that students who participate in CBL gain deeper and longer lasting knowledge than those who do not. [18] Compared with traditional methods, the application of practical knowledge (Objective Structure Clinic Examination, OSCE scores) through CBL is significantly improved. [19]

A limitation of this approach is that multiple faculty facilitators may be needed. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual teaching workshops emerged as an easy and straightforward way to implant a more interactive format into virtual case teaching for health professions [20]. That being said, there is yet to appear a proper teaching model that focuses on improving the entire quality management process dictated by ISO 15189 in clinical biochemistry courses.

Here, we designed a new student-centered training program based on CBL in the experimental teaching of a clinical biochemistry course, with the goal of improving the awareness of and ability to use quality management practices by students majoring in medical laboratory science.

Methods

Participant

References

Notes

This presentation is faithful to the original, with only a few minor changes to presentation, spelling, and grammar. In some cases important information was missing from the references, and that information was added. Several bits of text were inadvertently repeated, and those repetitions were removed. No citation was given for the Wake Forest quote, so one was added. Everything else remains true to the original article, per the "NoDerivatives" portion of the distribution license.