nach oben

Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy

Erschienen in:

23.05.2019 | Teaching Anatomy

Peer-assisted learning versus didactic teaching in osteology for first-year Indian undergraduate medical students: a quasi-experimental study

verfasst von: Lakshmi Trikkur Anantharaman, Yogitha Ravindranath, Stephen Dayal, Nachiket Shankar

Erschienen in: Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy | Ausgabe 10/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The utility of peer-assisted learning (PAL) in anatomy education has been recognized. In this study, PAL was incorporated into osteology teaching for the first-year medical students and compared to traditional didactic methods (TDM).

Methods

This was a cross-over intervention study. The class of 60 students was divided into two equal groups. The first group underwent PAL for five upper limb osteology sessions and TDM for all lower limb osteology classes. The second group underwent TDM for five upper limb osteology classes and PAL for lower limb osteology classes. A pre-session test (PrST) and post-session test (PoST) were conducted for each session using multiple choice type questions. Perceptions of students about PAL were collected using a questionnaire. Between and within group differences were estimated using the independent sample T test and paired T test, respectively. The responses in the questionnaire were summarized and open-ended responses categorized into broad themes.

Results

Greater group differences were noted in the PrST as compared to the PoST mean scores, with the PAL group showing higher mean scores for both upper and lower limb sessions. Significantly higher PoST scores compared to PrST scores for all the sessions were observed regardless of the method used. Significantly higher scores in the PrST or PoST scores were noted in the PAL group for five sessions. Most aspects of PAL were appreciated by the students.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that PAL is at least as effective as TDM in learning osteology among the first-year medical students.

Abedini M, Mortazavi F, Javadinia SA, Moonaghi HK (2013) A new teaching approach in basic sciences: peer assisted learning. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 83:39–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.008 CrossRef

Agius A, Stabile I (2018) Undergraduate peer assisted learning tutors’ performance in summative anatomy examinations: a pilot study. Int J Med Educ 9:93–98. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5aa3.e2a6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Agius A, Calleja N, Camenzuli C et al (2018) Perceptions of first-year medical students towards learning anatomy using cadaveric specimens through peer teaching. Anat Sci Educ 11:346–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1751 CrossRefPubMed

Ashdown L, Lewis E, Hincke M, Jalali A (2013) Learning anatomy: can dissection and peer-mediated teaching offer added benefits over prosection alone? ISRN Anat 2013:1–4. https://doi.org/10.5402/2013/873825 CrossRef

Awasthi S, Yadav K (2015) Assessment of the acceptance and effectiveness of peer-assisted learning in pediatrics. Int J Appl Basic Med Res 5:3. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-516X.162253 CrossRef

Benè KL, Bergus G (2014) When learners become teachers: a review of peer teaching in medical student education. Fam Med 46:783–787. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-13-00426 CrossRefPubMed

Bergman EM, Sieben JM, Smailbegovic I et al (2013) Constructive, collaborative, contextual, and self-directed learning in surface anatomy education. Anat Sci Educ 6:114–124. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1306 CrossRefPubMed

Blake T (2014) Teaching musculoskeletal examination skills to UK medical students: a comparative survey of Rheumatology and Orthopaedic education practice. BMC Med Educ 14:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-62 CrossRef

Bloodgood RA (2012) Active learning: a small group histology laboratory exercise in a whole class setting utilizing virtual slides and peer education. Anat Sci Educ 5:367–373. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1294 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Brueckner JK, Macpherson BR (2004) Benefits from peer teaching in the dental gross anatomy laboratory. J Dent Educ 8:72–77CrossRef

11.

Bruno PA, Love Green JK, Illerbrun SL et al (2016) Students helping students: evaluating a pilot program of peer teaching for an undergraduate course in human anatomy. Anat Sci Educ 9:132–142. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1543 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Buckley S, Zamora J (2007) Effects of participation in a cross year peer tutoring programme in clinical examination skills on volunteer tutors’ skills and attitudes towards teachers and teaching. BMC Med Educ 7:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-7-20 CrossRef

13.

Burgess A, McGregor D, Mellis C (2014) Medical students as peer tutors: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ 14:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-115 CrossRef

14.

Cantwell S, Bonadurer GF, Pawlina W, Lachman N (2015) Near-peer driven dissection selective: a primer to the medical school anatomy course. Clin Anat 28:985–993. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.22630 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Chopra J, Rani A, Rani A, Verma RK (2012) Traditional versus computer assisted teaching of human osteology: a randomized control trial study. Indian J Basic Appl Med Res 5:370–374

16.

Dale VHM, Nasir L, Sullivan M (2005) Evaluation of student attitudes to cooperative learning in undergraduate veterinary medicine. J Vet Med Educ 32:511–516. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.32.4.511 CrossRefPubMed

17.

de Oliveira CAM, de França Carvalho CP, Céspedes IC et al (2015) Peer mentoring program in an interprofessional and interdisciplinary curriculum in Brazil. Anat Sci Educ 8:338–347. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1534 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Dickman N, Barash A, Reis S, Karasik D (2017) Students as anatomy near-peer teachers: a double-edged sword for an ancient skill. BMC Med Educ 17:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0996-y CrossRef

19.

Durán CEP, Bahena EN, MDLAG Rodríguez M et al (2012) Near-peer teaching in an anatomy course with a low faculty-to-student ratio. Anat Sci Educ 5:171–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1269 CrossRefPubMed

20.

ElTantawi MMA, Abdelaziz H, AbdelRaheem AS, Mahrous AA (2014) Using peer-assisted learning and role-playing to teach generic skills to dental students: the health care simulation model. J Dent Educ 78:85–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(99)00027-8 CrossRef

21.

Evans DJR, Cuffe T (2009) Near-peer teaching in anatomy: an approach for deeper learning. Anat Sci Educ 2:227–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.110 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Graham K, Burke JM, Field M (2008) Undergraduate rheumatology: can peer-assisted learning by medical students deliver equivalent training to that provided by specialist staff? Rheumatology 47:652–655. https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/ken048 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Hailikari T, Katajavuori N, Lindblom-Ylanne S (2008) The relevance of prior knowledge in learning and instructional design. Am J Pharm Educ 72:1–8. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7205113 CrossRef

24.

Hall ER, Davis RC, Weller R et al (2013) Doing dissections differently: a structured, peer-assisted learning approach to maximizing learning in dissections. Anat Sci Educ 6:56–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1308 CrossRefPubMed

25.

Hall S, Lewis M, Border S (2013) Near-peer teaching in clinical neuroanatomy. Clin Teach 10:230–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12001 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Hall S, Stephens J, Andrade T et al (2014) Perceptions of junior doctors and undergraduate medical students as anatomy teachers: investigating distance along the near-peer teaching spectrum. Anat Sci Educ 7:242–247. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1419 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Hamso M, Ramsdell A, Balmer D, Boquin C (2012) Medical students as teachers at CoSMO, Columbia University’s student-run clinic: a pilot study and literature review. Med Teach 34:e189–e197. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.642832 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Han ER, Chung EK, Il Nam K (2015) Peer-assisted learning in a gross anatomy dissection course. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142988 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Harvey PR, Higenbottam CV, Owen A et al (2012) Peer-led training and assessment in basic life support for healthcare students: synthesis of literature review and fifteen years practical experience. Resuscitation 83:894–899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.01.013 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Heylings DJ, Stefani LAJ (1997) Peer assessment feedback marking in a large medical anatomy class. Med Educ 31:281–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1997.tb02926.x CrossRefPubMed

31.

Horneffer A, Fassnacht U, Oechsner W et al (2016) Effect of didactically qualified student tutors on their tutees’ academic performance and tutor evaluation in the gross anatomy course. Ann Anat 208:170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2016.05.008 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Hughes KS (2011) Peer-assisted learning strategies in human anatomy & physiology. Am Biol Teach 73:144–147. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2011.73.3.5 CrossRef

33.

Jauregui J, Bright S, Strote J, Shandro J (2018) A novel approach to medical student peer-assisted learning through case-based simulations. West J Emerg Med. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2017.10.35319 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Johansson E, Holmin TE, Johansson BR, Braide M (2018) Improving near-peer teaching quality in anatomy by educating teaching assistants: an example from Sweden. Anat Sci Educ 11:403–409. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1775 CrossRefPubMed

35.

Johnson JH (2002) Importance of dissection in learning anatomy: personal dissection versus peer teaching. Clin Anat 15:38–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.1090 CrossRefPubMed

36.

Knobe M, Sellei RM, Maus U et al (2010) Kurrikulare ultraschallausbildung am bewegungsapparat: einfluss der anatomischen vorbildung auf die weitergabe von basis-skills an der schulter. Z Orthop Unfall 148:685–690. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1250378 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Krych AJ, March CN, Bryan RE et al (2005) Reciprocal peer teaching: students teaching students in the gross anatomy laboratory. Clin Anat 18:296–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.20090 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Manyama M, Stafford R, Mazyala E et al (2016) Improving gross anatomy learning using reciprocal peer teaching. BMC Med Educ 16:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0617-1 CrossRef

39.

Mutwali IM, Hassan AN (2013) Skills training of junior medical students: can peer teaching be the solution? AJHPE 5:84–87. https://doi.org/10.7196/AJHPE.235 CrossRef

40.

Nagar S, Kubavat DM, Uttekar K et al (2013) Peer teaching in anatomy at GMERS medical college Gotri, Vadodara, Gujarat, India—peer teacher’s opinion. Int J Recent Trends Sci Technol 9:211–214

41.

Nestel D, Kidd J (2005) Peer assisted learning in patient-centred interviewing: the impact on student tutors. Med Teach 27:439–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590500086813 CrossRefPubMed

42.

O’Dunn-Orto A, Hartling L, Campbell S, Oswald AE (2012) Teaching musculoskeletal clinical skills to medical trainees and physicians: a best evidence in medical education systematic review of strategies and their effectiveness: BEME Guide No. 18. Med Teach 34:93–102. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.613961 CrossRefPubMed

43.

Olaussen A, Reddy P, Irvine S, Williams B (2016) Peer-assisted learning: time for nomenclature clarification. Med Educ Online 21:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v21.30974 CrossRef

44.

Ologunde R, Rabiu R (2014) Students as teachers: the value of peer-led teaching. Perspect Med Educ 3:61–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-013-0094-8 CrossRefPubMed

45.

Queally JM, Kiely PD, Shelly MJ et al (2008) Deficiencies in the education of musculoskeletal medicine in Ireland. Ir J Med Sci 177:99–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-008-0153-z CrossRefPubMed

46.

Rees EL, Quinn PJ, Davies B, Fotheringham V (2016) How does peer teaching compare to faculty teaching? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Teach 38:829–837. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2015.1112888 CrossRefPubMed

47.

Reyes-Hernández CG, Carmona Pulido JM, De la Garza Chapa RI et al (2015) Near-peer teaching strategy in a large human anatomy course: perceptions of near-peer instructors. Anat Sci Educ 8:189–193. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1484 CrossRefPubMed

48.

Rogers DA, Regehr G, Gelula M et al (2000) Peer teaching and computer-assisted learning: an effective combination for surgical skill training? J Surg Res 92:53–55. https://doi.org/10.1006/jsre.2000.5844 CrossRefPubMed

49.

Sahoo S, Venkatesan P, Myint KT, Moe S (2015) Peer-assisted learning activities during undergraduate ophthalmology training. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol 4:76–79. https://doi.org/10.1097/APO.0000000000000094 CrossRef

50.

Salomäki T, Laakkonen J, Ruohoniemi M (2014) Students as teachers in an anatomy dissection course. J Vet Med Educ 41:60–67. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.0113-013R2 CrossRefPubMed

51.

Sander B, Golas MM (2013) HistoViewer: an interactive e-learning platform facilitating group and peer group learning. Anat Sci Educ 6:182–190. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1336 CrossRefPubMed

52.

Schmid SC, Berberat PO, Gschwend JE, Autenrieth ME (2014) Praktische studentenausbildung in der urologie. Urologe 53:537–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3435-2 CrossRefPubMed

53.

Secomb J (2008) A systematic review of peer teaching and learning in clinical education. J Clin Nurs 17:703–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.01954.x CrossRefPubMed

54.

Skelley NW, Tanaka MJ, Skelley LM, LaPorte DM (2012) Medical student musculoskeletal education: an institutional survey. J Bone Jt Surg Ser A 94:1–7. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.01286 CrossRef

55.

Srivastava TK, Waghmare LS, Mishra V et al (2015) Peer teaching to foster learning in physiology. J Clin Diagn Res 9:JC01–JC06. https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2015/15018.6323 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

56.

Stephens JR, Hall S, Andrade MG, Border S (2016) Investigating the effect of distance between the teacher and learner on the student perception of a neuroanatomical near-peer teaching programme. Surg Radiol Anat 38:1217–1223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-016-1700-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

57.

Tai JHM, Canny BJ, Haines TP, Molloy EK (2016) The role of peer-assisted learning in building evaluative judgement: opportunities in clinical medical education. Adv Heal Sci Educ 21:659–676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9659-0 CrossRef

58.

Tamachi S, Giles JA, Dornan T, Hill EJR (2018) “You understand that whole big situation they’re in”: interpretative phenomenological analysis of peer-assisted learning. BMC Med Educ 18:197CrossRef

59.

Topping KJ (2005) Trends in peer learning. Educ Psychol 25:631–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172 CrossRef

60.

Van Sint Jan S, Crudele M, Gashegu J et al (2003) Development of multimedia learning modules for teaching human anatomy: application to osteology and functional anatomy. Anat Rec Part B New Anat 272:98–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.b.10020 CrossRef

61.

Waghmare JE, Sontakke BR, Tarnekar AM et al (2010) Reciprocal peer teaching: an innovative method to learn gross anatomy. J Mahatma Gandhi Inst Med Sci 15:40–43

62.

Walser J, Horneffer A, Oechsner W et al (2017) Quantitative and qualitative analysis of student tutors as near-peer teachers in the gross anatomy course. Ann Anat 210:147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2016.10.007 CrossRefPubMed

63.

Williams B, Reddy P (2016) Does peer-assisted learning improve academic performance? A scoping review. Nurse Educ Today 42:23–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.03.024 CrossRefPubMed

64.

Woolf AD, Walsh NE, Åkesson K (2004) Global core recommendations for a musculoskeletal undergraduate curriculum. Ann Rheum Dis 63:517–524. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2003.016071 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Peer-assisted learning versus didactic teaching in osteology for first-year Indian undergraduate medical students: a quasi-experimental study
verfasst von: Lakshmi Trikkur Anantharaman
Yogitha Ravindranath
Stephen Dayal
Nachiket Shankar
Publikationsdatum: 23.05.2019
Verlag: Springer Paris
Erschienen in: Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy / Ausgabe 10/2019
Print ISSN: 0930-1038
Elektronische ISSN: 1279-8517
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-019-02259-y

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

08.04.2024 | Andrologie | Nachrichten

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Peer-assisted learning versus didactic teaching in osteology for first-year Indian undergraduate medical students: a quasi-experimental study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen

Die Ganz-Genom-Sequenzierung startet

Update Radiologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2019

“Teşrih-ül Ebdan ve Tercümânı Kıbale-i Feylesûfan”: the first illustrated anatomy handwritten textbook in Ottoman-Turkish medicine

Abstracts of the oral communications and posters presented during the congress Anatomia Clinica

International Congress of Anatomia Clinica, 24–26 June 2019, Madrid, Spain

Development of cadaver perfusion models for surgical training: an experimental study

What is the history of the term “azygos vein” in the anatomical terminology?

3D printing anatomical models of head bones

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen

Die Ganz-Genom-Sequenzierung startet

Update Radiologie