Abstract

---

Background: In an ideal world we would expect students to favour seeing ‘real patients’ in our workshops but resource constraints may not allow this. We wondered what second year students (N=127) thought about a single station per workshop which allowed them to watch two short patient video diary clips (You-Tube), followed on by a group based discussion. This was a new station in contrast to the typical tutor-student role play scenario stations.
Summary of Work: We picked the G.I workshop and the C.V.S workshop to show the patient video diaries. Each clip was 2-3 minutes. A group discussion took place after each set of videos and a worksheet was given to all students based on the patient’s perspective5 .The students gave module feedback online some time later.
Summary of results: 86 % completed this. Q1: Are patient video worthwhile? (22% strongly agree, 50% agree, 15% neither agree nor disagree, 7% disagree, 6% strongly disagree). Q2: Do patient video diaries help you understand the patient perspective to a larger degree? (32% strongly agree, 50% agree, 12% neither agree nor disagree, 5% disagree). Q3: I would like access to more patient video diaries? (6% strongly agree, 42% agree, 34% neither agree nor disagree, 17% disagree, 1% strongly disagree). Qualitative data received from students in a free text space on ‘patient video diaries’ produced some interesting themes (70% completion).Themes which scored
Discussion: The student evaluation of the patient video diaries was mixed. The vast majority found that they were worthwhile but another cohort found them valueless. Perhaps different learners do not value the same learning tools. The majority felt that the patient video diaries were helpful in showing the patient’s perspective when it came to disease.
Conclusions: Patient video diaries are a useful teaching tool but will not suit all learners

 

 

Introduction

---

The medical school curriculum at N.U.I G is a student centred; systems based approach with emphasis on integration and professionalism. The professionalism module is taught in years 1 and 2 through five workshops in each year. These consist of clinical and communication skills teaching and early patient contact.
Evaluation of the curriculum is essential [1] and during times where funds are reduced we need to think of imaginative ways to maximise our teaching potential. In an ideal world we would expect students to favour seeing ‘real patients’ in our workshops but time and resource constraints may not allow this goal. The typical workshop usually involves role-play scenarios for a student with a tutor but we try to have at least 1-2 workshops per year with actual patients.
We wondered what second year students ( N=127) thought about a single station per workshop which allowed them to watch two short patient video diary clips and have a group based discussion after watching each set of clips. The students were given a worksheet which asked open questions about ‘disease from the patient’s perspective’ and also looked at a few clinical history points. All video clips were sourced from you-tube.

Methods

---

We picked the gastro-intestinal workshop and the cardiovascular workshop to show the patient video diaries. A group discussion took place after each video and a small worksheet was given to all students.[5]
The cardiovascular workshop showed a short clip of a patient describing a typical M.I. and then a second video speaking about an M.I. changes your life.[2,3]
The G.I workshop allowed us to show a video of a patient who had been diagnosed with Crohn’s disease and what his early symptoms were. A second young girl spoke about how Ulcerative Colitis affects her daily life.[4,5]
The students were then given an online module feedback questionnaire. We asked three closed questions on whether the students group felt this segment of the workshops was worthwhile, worth repeating and whether the patient’s perspective was made clearer by this exercise. The students rated their choice of answer on a lIkert scale.

Results

---

We had a completion rate of 86 %. The results are best shown graphically below

Figure 1 (The patient video diaries were worthwhile)

Figure 2 (Patient video diaries helped me to see the patients perspective)

Figure 3 (I would like more patient video diaries available to me during my training)

Qualitative data received from students in a free text space on ‘patient video diaries’.

Themes which scored

Table 1 (Themes and % who wrote of this issue)

Discussion

---

The students overwhelmingly felt that the patient video diaries were helpful in showing the patient’s perspective when it come to disease.
50% of students would like to have more patient video diaries available to them in their training whereas 16 % have no interest in this learning tool.
The qualitative data showed that those students who found this learning tool a negative experience made three points ,a)‘real patients are always better to learn from’ , b)these videos can be made available for free-time viewing without eating into clinical skills time and c)that the lack of practical skill practice with these session is their downfall. On the upside many felt the patient video diaries were an interesting concept, good to frame knowledge and able to convey the patient’s perspective well.

Conclusion(s)

---

The student evaluation of the patient video diaries was mixed. The vast majority found that they were worthwhile but another smaller cohort found no value at all in them. This could be that different learning styles will not value the same learning tools.

Source(s) of Funding

---

None

Competing Interests

---

None

Disclaimer

---

This article has been downloaded from WebmedCentral. With our unique author driven post publication peer review, contents posted on this web portal do not undergo any prepublication peer or editorial review. It is completely the responsibility of the authors to ensure not only scientific and ethical standards of the manuscript but also its grammatical accuracy. Authors must ensure that they obtain all the necessary permissions before submitting any information that requires obtaining a consent or approval from a third party. Authors should also ensure not to submit any information which they do not have the copyright of or of which they have transferred the copyrights to a third party.
Contents on WebmedCentral are purely for biomedical researchers and scientists. They are not meant to cater to the needs of an individual patient. The web portal or any content(s) therein is neither designed to support, nor replace, the relationship that exists between a patient/site visitor and his/her physician. Your use of the WebmedCentral site and its contents is entirely at your own risk. We do not take any responsibility for any harm that you may suffer or inflict on a third person by following the contents of this website.