PubMed · 15552075
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
L Voisey. 2002-03-23. Focus Awards 2001.. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4801375
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Computer-assisted teaching and learning tools offer new opportunities for improving education and training of medical professionals. CAMPUS represents a software for computer-based, problem-oriented learning. It is a case-based training system which provides the patient's history within a highly realistic, multimedia format. Thus, the interactive design is expected to challenge, test and improve the medical knowledge and the diagnostic skills of the students. The objective of the present study was to introduce CAMPUS as a computer-based learning tool and to present preliminary results with regard to acceptance and user-friendliness. METHODS: CAMPUS was evaluated by 52 students regarding quality and experienced learning success. A tutorial was conducted within separate, small-numbered groups of students, each working on one learning case. The virtual case started with a summary of the patient's leading symptoms. The students independently took the patient history and carried out the physical examination. Then, they were asked to suggest differential diagnoses, refer the patient to appropriate diagnostic examinations and were encouraged to choose adequate therapeutic strategies. Subsequently, the quality of CAMPUS and the subjective learning success were evaluated with a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: Nearly all students described the user interface as visually attractive (51/52) and clearly structured (52/52). In particular, the students found the use of videos to be advantageous. A marked learning success was described by most students (46/52) and all students considered learning with CAMPUS to be effective. CONCLUSION: CAMPUS offers an innovative training program to improve medical education and to enhance conventional teaching methods efficiently.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hospital malnutrition is prevalent, but nutritional practice in hospitals has a low priority. To improve the quality in nutritional routine, ESPEN has developed standards to improve the inadequate and insufficient nutritional treatments seen today. However, there is a discrepancy between the standards and clinical practice. This study was conducted to investigate nutritional practice in different hospital settings in relation to these standards (e.g.: screening of all patients, assessment of at-risk patients) among Scandinavian doctors and nurses. METHODS: A questionnaire about nutritional attitudes and routine was mailed to doctors and nurses in Denmark, Sweden and Norway. RESULTS: Altogether, 4512 (1753 doctors, 2759 nurses) answered the questionnaire. Both screening and assessment of at-risk patients differ between the countries. Nutritional screening was more common in Denmark (40%), compared to Sweden (21%) and Norway (16%). Measuring dietary intake in nutritional at-risk patients was more common in Denmark (46%), compared to Sweden (37%) and Norway (22%). However, all countries agreed that nutritional screening (92%, 88%, 88%) and measuring dietary intake (97%, 95%, 97%) were important, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, respectively. CONCLUSION: There is a large discrepancy between nutritional attitudes and practice. The standards suggested from the ESPEN are not fulfilled.
Patient-related end points are generally used to open up opinions and perspectives to the patient, which he/she may not previously have had or not been aware of. Such end points can only be reached if, first, the patient's priorities are taken into account when assessing cost-effectiveness of a medical measure and, second, if the doctor acts to mediate between the individual patient's preferences and medical needs. This requires a doctor's effort to communicate: this cannot be left to chance but has in part to be freshly conceived and systematically employed.