Near-peer compared to faculty teaching of abdominal ultrasound for medical students – A randomized-controlled trial

Abstract

Purpose Medical schools increasingly rely on near-peer tutors for ultrasound teaching. We set out to compare the efficacy of a blended near-peer ultrasound teaching program to that of a faculty course in a randomized controlled trial.

Methods 152 medical students received 21 hours of ultrasound teaching either by near-peer teachers or medical doctors. The near-peer course consisted of blended learning that included spaced repetition. The faculty-led course was the European common course for abdominal sonography. The primary outcome measurement was the students’ ultrasound knowledge at month 6, assessed by structured examination (score 0 to 50). Secondary outcomes included scores at month 0 and changes in scores after the course.

Results Students in the near-peer group scored 37 points, and students in the faculty group scored 31 points six months after course completion. The difference of 5.99 points (95% CI 4.48;7.49) in favor of the near-peer group was significant (p<0.001). Scores immediately after the course were 3.8 points higher in the near-peer group (2.35; 5.25, p<0.001). Ultrasound skills decreased significantly in the six months after course completion in the faculty group (–2.41 points, [–3.39; –1.42], p<0.001]) but barely decreased in the near-peer group (–0.22 points, [–1.19; 0.75, p=0.66]).

Conclusion The near-peer course that combined blended learning and spaced repetition outperformed standard faculty teaching in basic ultrasound education. This study encourages medical schools to use peer teaching combined with e-learning and spaced repetition as an effective means to meet the increasing demand for ultrasound training.

Zusamenfassung

Ziel Um die wachsende Nachfrage nach Lehreinheiten im Ultraschall zu decken, werden Near-Peer-Tutoren zunehmend in die Kurse eingebunden. Wir verglichen die Effektivität der Near-Peer-Lehre in einem „Blended-learning“-Programm mit der ärztlich geführten Lehre in einer kontrolliert-randomisierten Nichtunterlegenheitsstudie.

Methodik 152 Medizinstudierende wurden zu jeweils 21 Stunden Ultraschalllehre, entweder durch Near-Peer-Tutoren oder ärztliche Tutoren randomisiert. Der Near-Peer-Kurs beinhaltete „Spaced Repetition“, der ärztliche Kurs war der europäische Basiskurs für Abdomen-Ultraschall. Hauptergebnis waren die Ultraschallfähigkeiten nach 6 Monaten (0–50 Punkte). Nebenergebnisse waren die Fähigkeiten direkt nach dem Kurs und die Veränderung der Fähigkeiten über 6 Monate.

Ergebnisse Studierende in der Near-Peer-Gruppe erreichten 6 Monate nach Kursabschluss 37 Punkte, Studierende in der ärztlichen Gruppe 31 Punkte. Der Unterschied von 5,99 Punkten (95%-CI 4,48/7,49) zugunsten der Near-Peer-Gruppe war signifikant (p<0.001). Die Punktzahlen direkt nach dem Kurs waren in der Near-Peer-Gruppe 3,8 Punkte besser (2,35/5,25; p<0.001). In der ärztlichen Gruppe nahmen die Fähigkeiten über 6 Monate signifikant ab (–2,41 Punkte, [–3,39/–1,42, p<0.001]), im Gegensatz zur Near-Peer-Gruppe (–0,22 Punkte, [–1,19/0,75], p=0.66]). Schlussfolgerungen: Der Near-Peer-Kurs, welcher „blended Learning“ und „Spaced Repetition“ kombinierte, zeigte bessere Lernergebnisse als der ärztlich geführte Kurs. Diese Studie ermutigt medizinische Fakultäten, die Near-Peer-Lehre in Kombination mit „Spaced Repetition“ und e-Learning anzubieten, um dem steigenden Bedarf nach Ultraschalltraining zu entsprechen.

Keywords

Education, Training, Quality Assurance - Abdomen - Near-Peer Teaching - Spaced repetition

Publication History

Received: 02 November 2022

Accepted after revision: 31 May 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
31 May 2023

Article published online:
06 October 2023

• References

• 1 Michaud P, Jucker-Kupper P, The P. The “Profiles” document: a modern revision of the objectives of undergraduate medical studies in Switzerland. Swiss Med Wkly 2016; 146: w14270 DOI: 10.4414/smw.2016.14270. (PMID: 26829005)
• 2 Ten Cate O, Durning S. Dimensions and psychology of peer teaching in medical education. Medical Teacher 2007; 29: 546-552 DOI: 10.1080/01421590701583816. (PMID: 17978967)
• 3 Celebi N, Zwirner K, Lischner U. et al. Student Tutors Are Able to Teach Basic Sonographic Anatomy Effectively – a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. Ultraschall in Med 2010; 33: 141-145 DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1245837. (PMID: 21104601)
• 4 Hofer M, Kamper L, Heussen N. et al. Influence of Clinical Expertise Between Clinician-Instructors Versus Student-Instructors on the Effectiveness of Ultrasound Courses. Ultraschall in Med 2022; 43: 58-63 DOI: 10.1055/a-1176-0622.
• 5 Ben-Sasson A, Lior Y, Krispel J. et al. Peer-teaching cardiac ultrasound among medical students: A real option. PLoS ONE 2019; 14: e0212794 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212794.
• 6 Rees EL, Quinn PJ, Davies B. et al. How does peer teaching compare to faculty teaching? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Teacher 2016; 38: 829-837 DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2015.1112888.
• 7 Brierley C, Ellis L, Reid ER. Peer-assisted learning in medical education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ 2021; DOI: 10.1111/medu.14672. (PMID: 34595769)
• 8 Jeker L, Birrenbach T, Walter R. et al. Peer-Teaching in der Ultraschall-Ausbildung – Eine Übersichtsarbeit. Praxis 2020; 109: 631-635 DOI: 10.1024/1661-8157/a003498.
• 9 Blank WA, Blankenfeld H, Vogelmann R. et al. Can near-peer medical students effectively teach a new curriculum in physical examination?. BMC Med Educ 2013; 13: 165 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-13-165. (PMID: 24325639)
• 10 Hari R, Caprez R, Dolmans D. et al. Describing Ultrasound Skills Teaching by Near-Peer and Faculty Tutors Using Cognitive Apprenticeship. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 2022; 1-10 DOI: 10.1080/10401334.2022.2140430.
• 11 Alt L, Walter R, Hari R. et al. Near-Peers zuerst, ärztliche Tutorierende am Schluss. Zwischenbericht einer Mixed-Method-Studie zum Timing im Ultraschallunterricht. Praxis 2022; 111: 509-511 DOI: 10.1024/1661-8157/a003905.
• 12 Topping KJ. The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: A typology and review of the literature. Higher Education 1996; 32: 321-345 DOI: 10.1007/BF00138870.
• 13 Räschle N, Hari R. «Blended Learning»-Basiskurs Sonografie: Im Peer-Tutoring zu einem SGUM-akkreditierten Ultraschall-Kurs. Praxis 2018; 107: 1255-1259 DOI: 10.1024/1661-8157/a003116.
• 14 SIWF SI für ärztliche WF. Fähigkeitsprogramm Sonographie (SGUM). 2009
• 15 Augustin M. How to learn effectively in medical school: test yourself, learn actively, and repeat in intervals. Yale J Biol Med 2014; 87: 207-212 (PMID: 24910566)
• 16 Kerfoot BP, Fu Y, Baker H. et al. Online Spaced Education Generates Transfer and Improves Long-Term Retention of Diagnostic Skills: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2010; 211: 331-337.e1 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.04.023.
• 17 Carpenter SK, Cepeda NJ, Rohrer D. et al. Using Spacing to Enhance Diverse Forms of Learning: Review of Recent Research and Implications for Instruction. Educ Psychol Rev 2012; 24: 369-378 DOI: 10.1007/s10648-012-9205-z.
• 18 Kelm DJ, Ratelle JT, Azeem N. et al. Longitudinal Ultrasound Curriculum Improves Long-Term Retention Among Internal Medicine Residents. Journal of Graduate Medical Education 2015; 7: 454-457 DOI: 10.4300/JGME-14-00284.1.
• 19 Steinmetz P, Oleskevich S, Lewis J. Acquisition and Long-term Retention of Bedside Ultrasound Skills in First-Year Medical Students. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 2016; 35: 1967-1975 DOI: 10.7863/ultra.15.09088. (PMID: 27466256)
• 20 Vallée A, Blacher J, Cariou A. et al. Blended Learning Compared to Traditional Learning in Medical Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e16504 DOI: 10.2196/16504. (PMID: 32773378)
• 21 Tolsgaard MG, Gustafsson A, Rasmussen MB. et al. Student teachers can be as good as associate professors in teaching clinical skills. Medical Teacher 2007; 29: 553-557 DOI: 10.1080/01421590701682550. (PMID: 17978968)
• 22 Heinzow HS, Friederichs H, Lenz P. et al. Teaching ultrasound in a curricular course according to certified EFSUMB standards during undergraduate medical education: a prospective study. BMC Med Educ 2013; 13: 84 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-13-84.
• 23 Hofer M, Kamper L, Sadlo M. et al. Evaluation of an OSCE Assessment Tool for Abdominal Ultrasound Courses. Ultraschall in Med 2011; 32: 184-190 DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1246049. (PMID: 21321843)
• 24 Vetsch A, Berendonk C, Hari R. Reliabilität und Durchführbarkeit einer Ultraschallprüfung für ­Studierende in der Schweiz. Prim Hosp Care Med Int 2020; 297-300 DOI: 10.4414/phc-f.2020.10247.
• 25 SIGNATURE trial. Statistical Analysis Plan. Accessed March 02, 2023 at: https://www.biham.unibe.ch/research/research_projects/signature_trial/index_eng.html
• 26 Cohen Jack. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988. DOI: 10.4324/9780203771587
• 27 Nourkami-Tutdibi N, Tutdibi E, Schmidt S. et al. Long-Term Knowledge Retention after Peer-Assisted Abdominal Ultrasound Teaching: Is PAL a Successful Model for Achieving Knowledge Retention?. Ultraschall in Med 2020; 41: 36-43 DOI: 10.1055/a-1034-7749. (PMID: 31745964)
• 28 Matos J, Petri CR, Mukamal KJ. et al. Spaced education in medical residents: An electronic intervention to improve competency and retention of medical knowledge. PLoS ONE 2017; 12: e0181418 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181418. (PMID: 28759606)
• 29 Regmi K, Jones L. A systematic review of the factors – enablers and barriers – affecting e-learning in health sciences education. BMC Med Educ 2020; 20: 91 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02007-6. (PMID: 32228560)