• Acta Anaesthesiol Scand · Jan 2023

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Preparing for obstetric anaesthesia - an educational randomised controlled trial comparing e-learning to written course material.

    • Mette Legaard Andersson, Patricia Duch, Ebbe Lahn Bessmann, Lars Hyldborg Lundstrøm, and Kim Ekelund.
    • Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Odense University Hospital, Odense C, Denmark.
    • Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2023 Jan 1; 67 (1): 364336-43.

    BackgroundE-learning is increasingly used in postgraduate medical education. Its numerous benefits include an enhanced learning experience through learning style individualisation, interactive elements, and assessment through tests and quizzes. Current meta-analyses conclude that the overall effectiveness of e-learning is comparable to traditional teaching modalities. However, studies demonstrating its benefits are heterogeneous and of varying quality. This randomised controlled trial aims to investigate whether contemporary e-learning completed prior to a course in obstetric anaesthesia prepares the course participants better than self-study of written course material.MethodsA randomised controlled trial allocated second-year resident anaesthetists to receive either e-learning in postpartum haemorrhage and written course material in preeclampsia or e-learning in preeclampsia and written course material in postpartum haemorrhage, prior to a compulsory course in obstetric anaesthesia. The primary outcome was knowledge after completion of e-learning before the course, assessed by type X multiple-choice questions with a score ranging from zero to 35. The secondary outcomes were anxiety level before course simulations, performance during course simulations, and knowledge four and 12 weeks after the course.ResultsThe per protocol analysis of the primary outcome included 45 participants and demonstrated a mean difference of 1.8 (95% CI 0.7-2.9; p = .002) in knowledge after completion of e-learning before the course, in favour of e-learning compared to written course material. There were no statistically significant differences in the secondary outcomes.ConclusionThis blinded parallel group randomised controlled trial found a numerically small but statistically significant difference in knowledge favouring e-learning over written course material.© 2022 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.