The efficacy of intensive therapy and anaesthesiology virtual distance learning among fifth-year medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) brought several challenges in medical education. The aim of our study was to investigate whether virtual trainings (VT) organized during the COVID-19 pandemic at our university were effective in replacing in-person bed-side education in intensive therapy and anaesthesiology among fifth-year medical students, both from students' and instructors' perspectives. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study consisting of three parts: a 20-item students' questionnaire filled out by students participating in VT, a 22-item instructors' questionnaire filled out by instructors taking part in virtual education and a 20-item knowledge test completed by students participating in VT, as well as by students visiting bed-side trainings (BT) during the same semester, before COVID-19 pandemic. The questionnaires focused on effectiveness, content, self-preparedness, technical background and interactivity of VT. Instructors' and students' responses given to the common questions, as well as the knowledge test results were compared. Mann-Whitney U test was used for group comparisons and binary logistic regression was performed to analyse the influence of previous health-care experience on students' feeling of self-preparedness. Results: 113 students (68% response rate) and 29 instructors (97% response rate) filled out the questionnaires. The majority of students found our VT useful and effective; however, a considerable number of participants felt disadvantaged by taking a virtual course instead of bed-side learning sessions and would recommend to keep virtual distance learning methods combined with BT. Instructors found VT overall effective and deemed the transfer of their knowledge satisfactory; however, they described worse interactivity and contact with students during virtual sessions compared to in-person teaching. Instructors showed a clearer consensus that VT should not replace BT in the future, while students’ answers were more divided in this regard. Previous health-care experience did not influence students' feeling of self-preparedness. One hundred and twenty-seven students (56 after VT and 71 after BT) completed the end-of-semester knowledge test. Students participating in VT performed better than students visiting BT (median score VT:83.5 vs BT:77.3; p=0.015). Conclusions: The new curriculum incorporating virtual practice sessions was effective in maintaining continuous education of intensive therapy and anaesthesiology among fifth-year medical students during the COVID-19 outbreak.