Medical students in their first consultation: A comparison between a simulated face-to-face and telehealth consultation to train medical consultation skills.

Lena Dahmen, Maike Linke, Achim Schneider, Susanne J Kühl
Author Information
  1. Lena Dahmen: University of Ulm, Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Ulm, Germany.
  2. Maike Linke: Dresden University of Technology, Carl Gustav Carus Faculty of Medicine, Psychosocial Medicine and Developmental Neurosciences, Dresden, Germany.
  3. Achim Schneider: University of Ulm, Faculty of Medicine, Dean of Studies Office, Ulm, Germany.
  4. Susanne J Kühl: University of Ulm, Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Ulm, Germany.

Abstract

Objective: A simulated conversation between a physician and a family member, i.e., a medical conversation, was changed from a conventional face-to-face conversation (SS 2019) to a telehealth conversation (SS 2020) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The medical education conversation is part of the biochemistry seminar "From Genes to Proteins" which second semester human medicine students take. The objective of this study was to analyze to what extent the switch from face-to-face to telehealth conversations affected student satisfaction and motivation.
Methodology: In the seminar, students study biochemical as well as competency-oriented content, such as how to talk to family members. In the summer semester of 2019, students were trained how to talk to their patients' family members in a traditional conversation setting with the help of lay actors in a classroom format. In the summer semester of 2020, this conversation took place under comparable conditions, but in the form of an online telehealth conversation instead. Student satisfaction and motivation were surveyed by means of an evaluation questionnaire following the seminar in both semesters.
Results: Both conversation formats achieved a high level of satisfaction from students (school grade A-B). For some evaluation items, such as "realistic conversation simulation", the face-to-face conversation was perceived as more satisfying () than the telehealth conversation (). In addition, the face-to-face conversation resulted in higher subjective motivation from students () than that of the telehealth conversation ().
Conclusion: The high student satisfaction and acceptance of both didactic concepts leads to the conclusion that the simulated telehealth conversation is an adequate substitute for the simulation of a traditional face-to-face conversation with regard to the parameters that were studied.

Keywords

References

  1. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Mar 15;38(3):Doc59 [PMID: 33824895]
  2. Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Aug 29;69(686):e586-e594 [PMID: 31160368]
  3. GMS J Med Educ. 2022 Sep 15;39(4):Doc46 [PMID: 36310883]
  4. GMS J Med Educ. 2020 Dec 03;37(7):Doc83 [PMID: 33364362]
  5. GMS J Med Educ. 2017 Aug 15;34(3):Doc31 [PMID: 28890922]
  6. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Jan 28;38(1):Doc19 [PMID: 33659624]
  7. GMS J Med Educ. 2022 Apr 14;39(2):Doc22 [PMID: 35692358]
  8. Lancet. 2001 Mar 10;357(9258):757-62 [PMID: 11253970]
  9. GMS J Med Educ. 2020 Dec 03;37(7):Doc85 [PMID: 33364364]
  10. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Jan 28;38(1):Doc21 [PMID: 33659626]
  11. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2002 Jan-Feb;15(1):25-38 [PMID: 11841136]
  12. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Apr 15;38(4):Doc81 [PMID: 34056070]
  13. CMAJ. 1995 May 1;152(9):1423-33 [PMID: 7728691]
  14. GMS J Med Educ. 2019 May 16;36(3):Doc27 [PMID: 31211222]
  15. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Mar 15;38(3):Doc57 [PMID: 33824893]
  16. Med Teach. 2019 Nov;41(11):1245-1251 [PMID: 31282246]
  17. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Mar 15;38(3):Doc56 [PMID: 33824892]
  18. BMJ Open. 2022 May 26;12(5):e050823 [PMID: 35618331]
  19. BMC Med Educ. 2019 Feb 28;19(1):64 [PMID: 30819178]
  20. Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2022 Sep;50(5):483-493 [PMID: 35841313]
  21. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Apr 15;38(4):Doc83 [PMID: 34056072]
  22. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Jan 28;38(1):Doc4 [PMID: 33659609]
  23. J Med Internet Res. 2019 Aug 27;21(8):e12967 [PMID: 31456579]
  24. GMS J Med Educ. 2020 Dec 03;37(7):Doc82 [PMID: 33364361]
  25. GMS J Med Educ. 2019 Nov 15;36(6):Doc73 [PMID: 31844645]
  26. Educ Prim Care. 2022 Jan;33(1):53-58 [PMID: 33913401]
  27. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Mar 15;38(3):Doc58 [PMID: 33824894]

MeSH Term

Humans
Students, Medical
Pandemics
Education, Medical
Referral and Consultation
Telemedicine

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0conversationtelehealthface-to-facestudentssimulatedfamilysatisfactionmedicalseminarsemestermotivationmembersphysicianSS20192020biochemistrystudystudenttalksummertraditionalactorsevaluationhighconsultationObjective:memberiechangedconventionaldueCOVID-19pandemiceducationpart"FromGenesProteins"secondhumanmedicinetakeobjectiveanalyzeextentswitchconversationsaffectedMethodology:biochemicalwellcompetency-orientedcontenttrainedpatients'settinghelplayclassroomformattookplacecomparableconditionsformonlineinsteadStudentsurveyedmeansquestionnairefollowingsemestersResults:formatsachievedlevelschoolgradeA-Bitems"realisticsimulation"perceivedsatisfyingadditionresultedhighersubjectiveConclusion:acceptancedidacticconceptsleadsconclusionadequatesubstitutesimulationregardparametersstudiedMedicalfirstconsultation:comparisontrainskillspatientscommunicationpatient’se-learning

Similar Articles

Cited By (2)