| Popis: |
Yahya Abdulrahman Al-Najmi,1 Ahmed Hussein Subki,2 Nazih Suwalih Alzaidi,3 Nadeem Shafique Butt,4 Alaa Abdulhamid Alsammahi,5 Firas Mohamed Madani,5 Mohammed Saad Alsallum,6 Rakan Salah Al-Harbi,7 Nizar Mohammed Alhibshi5 1Saggaf Eye Center, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 2Department of Internal Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 3Ophthalmology Department, Prince Mansour Military Hospital, At Taif, Saudi Arabia; 4Department of Community Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 5Department of Ophthalmology, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 6Department of Neurology, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 7Department of Family Medicine, King Fahd Armed Forces Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi ArabiaCorrespondence: Yahya Abdulrahman Al-NajmiSaggaf Eye Center, Abdullah Salman St., Al Faiha’a Dist., P.O. Box: 31903, Jeddah, 21418, Saudi ArabiaTel +966 564844281Email dr.alnajmi@gmail.comNizar Mohammed AlhibshiDepartment of Ophthalmology, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, P.O. Box 50805, Jeddah, 21533, Saudi ArabiaTel +966 505609950Email alhibshi@doctor.comObjective: To investigate the perception and satisfaction of ophthalmology residents with the currently provided ophthalmology curricula to medical students.Methods: A cross-sectional survey involving first to fourth year ophthalmology residents (N = 106) from all regions of Saudi Arabia was conducted between December 2018 and February 2019. An online questionnaire explored opinions about the ophthalmology course regarding three dimensions. Firstly, adequacy in covering essential parts of the specialty; secondly, improvements required; and thirdly, effectiveness. A score (0– 21) was calculated, indicating the overall suitability of the ophthalmology course. In addition, factors of good overall suitability (score ≥ 10) were analyzed.Results: Regarding adequacy, respondents opined that the ophthalmology course did not reasonably cover the basic part (35.8%), clinical part (61.3%), common disease (26.4%), and emergencies (39.6%). Concerning improvements required, more than 80% of the participants expressed that the course required to be improved for all its features, including duration (80.2%), objectives (85.8%), content (82.1%), organization (83.0%), and supervision (81.1%). As to effectiveness, half of them deemed the course unhelpful in familiarizing general practitioners with common ophthalmic diseases and emergencies. Overall, the ophthalmology course was generally deemed suitable (score ≥ 10) for only 27.4% of the participants, with no differences across gender, level, or region.Conclusion: Ophthalmology residents perceived multiple deficits in the current Saudi ophthalmology teaching course. Significant improvements in ophthalmologic curricula are required, besides coping with unprecedented technological advancement in the ophthalmological field.Keywords: ophthalmology, course, curriculum, academic, specialty, assessment, residents, opinions |
