Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess an e-Learning on Acute Burns Management

Abstract

An e-learning tutorial was developed to cover the basic aspects of acute burns management. The aim of this study was to provide objective educational evidence supporting the role of an e-learning on acute burns management ("basic burns management" or BBM) when compared with traditional teaching methods when introduced in different medical school settings around the world. A multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted at the University of Pittsburgh, Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, and St. George's University of London comparing the learning experience of medical students with the BBM e-learning tool (intervention) and a traditional lecture (control). A group of medical students was randomly allocated to the e-learning or lecture arms. Both groups were subjected to a 10-question pre-intervention and post-intervention tests assessing burns knowledge, and were asked to fill out a satisfaction survey. A total of 79 medical students of varying years of study participated. As a whole, students demonstrated a significant gain in knowledge after intervention (overall = 47.6%, P < .001), regardless of medical school year of study or interest in surgery. Participants undertaking the BBM e-learning had a greater exam score improvement and satisfaction compared with the traditional lecture even though they were not statistically significant. BBM e-learning is a free tool that provides comparable acute burn care learning opportunity and satisfaction outcomes to a traditional lecture, allowing convenient and standardized incorporation of burns teaching within an educational setting, regardless of geographical location, level of experience, or interest in surgery.

Exploring the activities and outcomes of digital teaching and learning of practical skills in higher education for the social and health care professions: a scoping review

“…The target groups included medical students (n = 30) [ 24 – 35 , 37 , 38 , 40 , 41 , 48 , 49 , 56 – 59 , 61 , 62 , 64 – 66 , 69 – 71 ], nursing students (n = 16) [ 36 , 42 , 43 , 45 , 47 , 50 , 52 – 55 , 60 , 63 , 67 , 68 , 72 ], midwifery students (n = 1) [ 51 ], and dental students (n = 3) [ 39 , 44 , 46 ].…”

“…One study reported that a shareable weblink was used but offered no specific information [ 32 ]. Regarding the remaining four studies, four different virtual learning environments were used: Basic Burns Management e-learning tool [ 66 ], Education in Dermatology [ 41 ], the VBLaST-PC system for fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery [ 70 ], and the CASUS—a case-based multimedia learning and authoring system for undergraduate, postgraduate and continuing education [ 28 ]. Thus, the studies showed substantial variation in the learning environment, making it difficult to draw conclusions of any kind.…”

“…No demographic data was reported Virtual learning environment, no further specification, medical program The e-learning course was created with Articulate360 and the tool Rise, and was shared with the participants via a weblink that they could use as often they wanted before the course In the face-to-face course, an interactive tutorial was given based on the problems and learning objectives they had identified Traditional lecture during the face-to-face course Knowledge and confidence were measured with 20 questions with single-best-answers, and 10 situations to be assessed with a visual analogue scale before and after the face-to-face course The sample size was small It was not possible to monitor how many students accessed the online resource and how often There were no significant differences between groups for any of the measures. Both groups improved significantly in the 10 situations assessment but not in the 20 questions assessment Egro et al [ 66 ], 2018, USA & United Kingdom To provide evidence supporting the role of an e-learning, (EL) on acute burns management (“basic burns management”/ BBM) when compared with traditional teaching(TL) methods A tutor was present during the interventions N = 79 medical students of varying years of education. No demographic data was reported A 33-webpage EL tool ( www.basicburnsmanage-ment.com ) was created A 10-min video was also developed to aid students to demonstrate how to approach burn patients in an emergency setting and reflect on what they have learned Basic Burns Management e-Learning: 1-h self-directed learning A tutor was present during the EL session for assistance and to answer questions A traditional lecture one-hour teaching session covering the same topics as the Basic Burns Management EL tool.…”

Surviving the COVID — 19 Pandemic Resurgence: Not Easy but Achievable

“…There has been a tremendous effort to develop teaching methods and tools making use of ever-increasing technological advancement. A review of medical literature over the last fifteen years demonstrates a wide variety of tools developed and studied, from 'home-grown' e-learning modules [14][15][16][17][18] to proprietary internet accessible computer aided learning systems [19][20][21][22][23][24]. These materials include both medical knowledge and clinical decision-making concepts that often take the form of case studies, many of which are interactive.…”

“…There is clear evidence to support that electronic learning modalities can offer equivalent or even superior results than 'traditional' methods, and that students appear to find many of these experiences satisfactory, sometimes rating them more favorably than textbook learning or lecture experiences [14,15,18,19,24,25]. All these different options must be considered within the learning objectives set by the medical schools.…”