Hands-On Surgical Training Workshop: an Active Role-Playing Patient Education for Adolescents
| Autor: | Pangpoom Boonyawong, Kasaya Tantiphlachiva, Peera Rhunsiri, Apinut Wongkietkachorn |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2016 |
| Předmět: |
Male
Laparoscopic surgery medicine.medical_specialty Adolescent Teaching method medicine.medical_treatment education Education 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Patient Education as Topic Surveys and Questionnaires medicine Humans Robotic surgery 030212 general & internal medicine Role Playing Medical education 030504 nursing Apprehension business.industry Public Health Environmental and Occupational Health Problem-Based Learning Oncology Problem-based learning General Surgery Passive learning Active learning Physical therapy Female medicine.symptom 0305 other medical science business Patient education |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Cancer Education. 32:543-548 |
| ISSN: | 1543-0154 0885-8195 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s13187-016-0988-3 |
| Popis: | Most patient education involves passive learning. To improve patient education regarding surgery, an active learning workshop-based teaching method is proposed. The objective of this study was to assess level of patient surgical knowledge, achievement of workshop learning objectives, patient apprehension about future surgery, and participant workshop satisfaction after completing a surgical training workshop. A four-station workshop (surgical scrub, surgical suture, laparoscopic surgery, and robotic surgery) was developed to teach four important components of the surgical process. Healthy, surgery-naive adolescents were enrolled to attend this 1-h workshop-based training program. Training received by participants was technically and procedurally identical to training received by actual surgeons. Pre- and post-workshop questionnaires were used to assess learning outcomes. There were 1312 participants, with a mean age 15.9 ± 1.1 years and a gender breakdown of 303 males and 1009 females. For surgical knowledge, mean pre-workshop and post-workshop scores were 6.1 ± 1.5 and 7.5 ± 1.5 (out of 10 points), respectively (p |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink