Artikel
Distribution and impact of a manual for clinical mentors in the final year
Suche in Medline nach
Autoren
-
Elisabeth Narciß
- Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
-
Katrin Schüttpelz-Brauns
- Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
-
Maria Lammerding-Köppel
- University Tübingen, Medical Faculty, Tübingen, Germany
-
Irmgard Streitlein-Böhme
- University Freiburg, Medical Faculty, Freiburg, Germany
-
Jan Stiepak
- University Heidelberg, Medical Faculty, Heidelberg, Germany
-
Wolfgang Öchsner
- University Ulm, Medical Faculty, Ulm, Germany
-
Kathrin Nühse
- Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| Veröffentlicht: | 7. März 2017 |
|---|
Gliederung
Text
Introduction: A survey among clinical teachers in Baden-Württemberg (BW), responsible for final year students, revealed in 2013, that there was a lack of information concerning the organisation and standards of clinical training in the final year (e. g. interviews, case presentation, logbook-check). Therefore we jointly developed a "Manual for final year mentors", to which all five medical faculties in BW contributed. In 2015 this manual was distributed to 1864 final year mentors in BW.
Objectives: We wanted to find out, (1) whether final year mentors had actually received the manual, (2) whether and how much content they had read and (3) whether the provided information had an impact on the standards of clinical training during the final year of our students.
Materials & methods: In 2016 we repeated the survey online in BW among clinical teachers and mentors, who took care of our final year students. This survey included six items, directly addressing the reception, the amount of content read and the impact of the manual. Furthermore, we analysed four out of seven items addressing the standards of clinical training of final year students to see, if the reading of at least 25% of the manual had an effect. Statistical analysis was carried out with SPSS, conducting chi-square tests.
Results: 503 clinical mentors answered the questionnaire. 276 (55%) doctors received the manual, 168 (61%) of them in print and 106 (39%) as pdf file or internet link. 248 (90%) read more than 25% of the content. 205 (85%) of them considered the content helpful for final year training of students and 224 (92%) found auxiliary tips. Doctors, who read more than 25% of the manual, followed the manual´s advice and conducted significantly more interviews at the beginning and/or at the end of the rotation (93% vs 74% and 90% vs 78%). The same effect was observed for the case presentation of final year students (72% vs 51%). However, the logbook-check was not done more frequently.
Conclusion: We reached more than half of our survey group in BW with the common manual. Those mentors, who read at least 25% of the manual, evaluated it as helpful. The manual proved to have a positive effect on the mentoring of final year students.
