引用本文:郭凌云,刘琳琳,刘钢,王爱华.儿科专业基地指导教师床旁教学现状调查及对策[J].中华医学教育探索杂志,2024,23(5):599-605
儿科专业基地指导教师床旁教学现状调查及对策
Bedside teaching at pediatric bases: current status and thoughts
DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20230726-01631
中文关键词:  儿科  床旁教学  教学质量  教学方法
英文关键词:Pediatrics  Bedside teaching  Teaching quality  Teaching method
基金项目:2021 年住院医师规范化培训质量提高项目(住培2021009);教育部产学合作协同育人项目(220701285023144)
作者单位邮编
郭凌云 国家儿童医学中心/首都医科大学附属北京儿童医院感染内科/教育部儿科重大疾病研究重点实验室北京 100045
中国医学科学院儿童危重感染诊治创新单元北京 100045 
100045
刘琳琳 国家儿童医学中心/首都医科大学附属北京儿童医院感染内科/教育部儿科重大疾病研究重点实验室北京 100045
中国医学科学院儿童危重感染诊治创新单元北京 100045 
100045
刘钢 国家儿童医学中心/首都医科大学附属北京儿童医院感染内科/教育部儿科重大疾病研究重点实验室北京 100045
中国医学科学院儿童危重感染诊治创新单元北京 100045 
100045
王爱华* 国家儿童医学中心/首都医科大学附属北京儿童医院教育处北京 100045 100045
摘要点击次数: 188
全文下载次数: 89
中文摘要:
      目的 了解儿科专业基地指导教师床旁教学的现状,分析儿科床旁教学现存的问题并对如何促进儿科床旁教学有效开展进行讨论。方法 选择参加2022年全国住院医师规范化培训儿科专业基地骨干师资培训班的475名指导教师作为研究对象,对儿科床旁教学的情况进行问卷调查。按医疗职称将指导教师分为主治医师组、副主任医师及主任医师两组,对比分析两组指导教师一般资料、床旁教学比例、床旁教学困难、需加强的能力等情况。采用SPSS 21.0进行卡方检验。结果 共有475名指导教师参与调查问卷。96.84%(460/475)的指导教师来自三级甲等医院,其中54.11%(257/475)的指导教师从事临床教学的工作时间大于10年。日常临床教学中97.26%(462/475)的指导教师进行床旁教学,但床旁教学占日常临床教学的时间比例低,大于50.00%的占30.11%(143/475)。儿科床旁教学中的主要困难为儿科病房或门急诊环境嘈杂[75.58%(359/475)]、教学时间少[71.16%(338/475)]、临床压力大[64.63%(307/475)]、患儿配合程度低[54.95%(261/475)]、儿科病房或门急诊有家长陪同[44.84%(213/475)]、住院医师背景差别大[41.68%(198/475)]、科研压力大[30.11%(143/475)]等。主治医师中有41.20%(96/233)的指导教师床旁教学时间小于30.00%,而副主任医师及主任医师则为28.57%(68/238),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 儿科指导教师从事床旁教学的时间占比过低,与儿科就诊环境嘈杂、儿科指导教师临床压力大等诸多因素有关。
英文摘要:
      Objective To investigate the current status of bedside teaching at pediatric bases and existing problems in pediatric bedside teaching, and to discuss how to improve bedside teaching in pediatrics.Methods A questionnaire on pediatric bedside teaching was administered to 475 instructors who had participated in the backbone teacher training course of pediatric standardized residency training bases in 2022. The instructors were divided into two groups according to their medical professional titles: attending physician group and associate chief physician/chief physician group. The general information, bedside teaching rate, bedside teaching difficulties, and abilities that need to be strengthened were compared between the two groups of instructors. SPSS 21.0 was used to perform the chi-square test.Results A total of 475 instructors responded to the questionnaire. Among them, 96.84% (460/475) were from tertiary class-A hospitals; 54.11% (257/475) had more than 10 years of clinical teaching practice; and 97.26% (462/475) conducted bedside teaching, but the proportion of bedside teaching time in routine clinical teaching was low, with only 30.11% (143/475) reaching >50.00%. The main difficulties in bedside teaching in pediatrics included noisy environments at pediatric wards or clinics (75.58%, 359/475), the lack of teaching time (71.16%, 338/475), intense clinical pressure (64.63%, 307/475), poor cooperation with children (54.95%, 261/475), the presence of parents at pediatric wards or clinics (44.84%, 213/475), varying levels of qualifications of residents (41.68%, 198/475), and high pressure of scientific research (30.11%, 143/475). There were 41.20% (96/233) of the attending physicians and 28.57% (68/238) of the associate chief physicians/chief physicians spending less than 30.00% of their teaching time at the bedside, respectively, which were significantly different (P<0.05).Conclusions The low proportion of time spent on bedside teaching among pediatric instructors is driven by various factors such as noisy pediatric environments and the great clinical pressure of pediatric teachers.
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭
微信关注二维码