View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Teaching the rectal examination with simulations: effects on knowledge acquisition and inhibition.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Teaching the rectal examination with simulations: effects on knowledge acquisition and inhibition.
Authors: Siebeck, Matthias (AUTHOR), Schwald, Bärbel (AUTHOR), Frey, Claudia (AUTHOR), Röding, Stefanie (AUTHOR), Stegmann, Karsten (AUTHOR), Fischer, Frank (AUTHOR)
Source: Medical Education. Oct2011, Vol. 45 Issue 10, p1025-1031. 7p. 2 Charts, 2 Graphs.
Subjects: Clinical competence, Analysis of covariance, Analysis of variance, Human anatomical models, Psychology of medical students, Study & teaching of medicine, Palpation, Rectum examination, Research funding, Statistical sampling, Scale analysis (Psychology), Simulated patients, Student attitudes, T-test (Statistics), Empirical research, Educational outcomes, Repeated measures design, Psychology of Undergraduates, Psychology
Abstract: Medical Education 2011: 45: 1025-1031 Context Undergraduate medical curricula are often deficient in teaching physical examinations in intimate zones, such as the rectal examination. Student inhibition is assumed to substantially hamper both the acquisition of knowledge and the performance of these examinations in practice. Objectives The two present studies examined the effects of low-fidelity (LFS) and high-fidelity (HFS) simulation on the acquisition of the necessary knowledge and inhibition about carrying out the rectal examination. In addition, we investigated the effects of the different sequencing of the two simulations (HFS-LFS versus LFS-HFS). Methods A manikin for the rectal examination was used to implement the LFS. Standardised patients (SPs) were used to implement the HFS. Study samples consisted of 41 (Study 1) and 188 (Study 2) female and male undergraduate medical students. Each student participated in two individual sessions of 30 minutes each. Half the students participated first in the HFS and then in the LFS and the other half participated in the simulations in the opposite order. Outcome measures were self-rated inhibition and knowledge tests. Results In both studies, HFS was found to reduce inhibition significantly more than LFS. Furthermore, in Study 2, a marginal effect of the sequence of simulation was found. In both studies, both types of simulation were found to facilitate the acquisition of knowledge. There was no sequence effect for the acquisition of knowledge. Conclusions Teaching the rectal examination with the help of SPs, who represent an HFS, can help medical undergraduate students to overcome inhibition about this examination. Standardised patient simulation is far more effective than that achieved using a manikin, which represents an LFS. Both types of simulation support the acquisition of knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 65382740
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Teaching the rectal examination with simulations: effects on knowledge acquisition and inhibition.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Siebeck%2C+Matthias%22">Siebeck, Matthias</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Schwald%2C+Bärbel%22">Schwald, Bärbel</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Frey%2C+Claudia%22">Frey, Claudia</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Röding%2C+Stefanie%22">Röding, Stefanie</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stegmann%2C+Karsten%22">Stegmann, Karsten</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fischer%2C+Frank%22">Fischer, Frank</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Medical+Education%22">Medical Education</searchLink>. Oct2011, Vol. 45 Issue 10, p1025-1031. 7p. 2 Charts, 2 Graphs.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Clinical+competence%22">Clinical competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Analysis+of+covariance%22">Analysis of covariance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Analysis+of+variance%22">Analysis of variance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Human+anatomical+models%22">Human anatomical models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychology+of+medical+students%22">Psychology of medical students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Study+%26+teaching+of+medicine%22">Study & teaching of medicine</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Palpation%22">Palpation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Rectum+examination%22">Rectum examination</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+funding%22">Research funding</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Statistical+sampling%22">Statistical sampling</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scale+analysis+%28Psychology%29%22">Scale analysis (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Simulated+patients%22">Simulated patients</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+attitudes%22">Student attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22T-test+%28Statistics%29%22">T-test (Statistics)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Empirical+research%22">Empirical research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+outcomes%22">Educational outcomes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Repeated+measures+design%22">Repeated measures design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychology+of+Undergraduates%22">Psychology of Undergraduates</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychology%22">Psychology</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Medical Education 2011: 45: 1025-1031 Context Undergraduate medical curricula are often deficient in teaching physical examinations in intimate zones, such as the rectal examination. Student inhibition is assumed to substantially hamper both the acquisition of knowledge and the performance of these examinations in practice. Objectives The two present studies examined the effects of low-fidelity (LFS) and high-fidelity (HFS) simulation on the acquisition of the necessary knowledge and inhibition about carrying out the rectal examination. In addition, we investigated the effects of the different sequencing of the two simulations (HFS-LFS versus LFS-HFS). Methods A manikin for the rectal examination was used to implement the LFS. Standardised patients (SPs) were used to implement the HFS. Study samples consisted of 41 (Study 1) and 188 (Study 2) female and male undergraduate medical students. Each student participated in two individual sessions of 30 minutes each. Half the students participated first in the HFS and then in the LFS and the other half participated in the simulations in the opposite order. Outcome measures were self-rated inhibition and knowledge tests. Results In both studies, HFS was found to reduce inhibition significantly more than LFS. Furthermore, in Study 2, a marginal effect of the sequence of simulation was found. In both studies, both types of simulation were found to facilitate the acquisition of knowledge. There was no sequence effect for the acquisition of knowledge. Conclusions Teaching the rectal examination with the help of SPs, who represent an HFS, can help medical undergraduate students to overcome inhibition about this examination. Standardised patient simulation is far more effective than that achieved using a manikin, which represents an LFS. Both types of simulation support the acquisition of knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=65382740
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04005.x
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 7
        StartPage: 1025
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Clinical competence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Analysis of covariance
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Analysis of variance
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Human anatomical models
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychology of medical students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Study & teaching of medicine
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Palpation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Rectum examination
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research funding
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Statistical sampling
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scale analysis (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Simulated patients
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: T-test (Statistics)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Empirical research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational outcomes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Repeated measures design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychology of Undergraduates
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychology
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Teaching the rectal examination with simulations: effects on knowledge acquisition and inhibition.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Siebeck, Matthias
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Schwald, Bärbel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Frey, Claudia
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Röding, Stefanie
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Stegmann, Karsten
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fischer, Frank
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 10
              Text: Oct2011
              Type: published
              Y: 2011
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 03080110
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 45
            – Type: issue
              Value: 10
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Medical Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1