GMS Journal for Medical Education (Dec 2020)

Isn’t here just there without a “t” – to what extent can digital Clinical Case Discussions compensate for the absence of face-to-face teaching?

  • Zottmann, Jan M.,
  • Horrer, Anna,
  • Chouchane, Amir,
  • Huber, Johanna,
  • Heuser, Sonja,
  • Iwaki, Lica,
  • Kowalski, Christian,
  • Gartmeier, Martin,
  • Berberat, Pascal O.,
  • Fischer, Martin R.,
  • Weidenbusch, Marc

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001392
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 37, no. 7
p. Doc99

Abstract

Read online

Objective: COVID-19 challenges curriculum managers worldwide to create digital substitutes for classroom teaching. Case-based teaching formats under expert supervision can be used as a substitute for practical bedside teaching, where the focus is on teaching clinical reasoning skills.Methods: For medical students of LMU and TU Munich, the interactive, case-based, and supervised teaching format of Clinical Case Discussion (CCD) was digitised and implemented as dCCD in their respective curricula. Case discussions were realised as videoconferences, led by a student moderator, and took place under the supervision of a board-certified clinician. To prevent passive participation, additional cognitive activations were implemented. Acceptance, usability, and subjective learning outcomes were assessed in dCCDs by means of a special evaluation concept.Results: With regard to acceptance, students were of the opinion that they had learned effectively by participating in dCCDs (M=4.31; SD=1.37). The majority of students also stated that they would recommend the course to others (M=4.23; SD=1.62). The technical implementation of the teaching format was judged positively overall, but findings for usability were heterogeneous. Students rated their clinical reasoning skills at the end of the dCCDs (M=4.43; SD=0.66) as being significantly higher than at the beginning (M=4.33; SD=0.69), with low effect size, t(181)=-2.352, p=.020, d=0.15.Conclusion: Our evaluation data shows that the dCCD format is well-accepted by students as a substitute for face-to-face teaching. In the next step, we plan to examine the extent to which participation in dCCDs leads to an increase in objectively measured clinical reasoning skills, analogous to a face-to-face CCD with on-site attendance.

Keywords