Proceedings of The Physiological Society

Europhysiology 2018 (London, UK) (2018) Proc Physiol Soc 41, PCB082

Poster Communications

Perceptions of medical students about an elective on shock physiopathology

A. Kudaibergenova1,2, I. Coskun2, S. A. Vardar1

1. Physiology, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Edirne, Turkey. 2. Trakya University Faculty of Education, Edirne, Turkey.


Introduction: Student-centered teaching methods have been considered important in the preclinical phase of the first three years of medical education. For third-year students, an elective course module named "Advanced Approach to Shock Physiopathology and Therapy" has been carried out in Trakya University Medical Faculty during four consecutive years between 2014 and 2017 in cooperation with physiology, emergency medicine, cardiology, infectious diseases, neurology departments and intensive care unit. This course, with a total of 170 hours workload, consisted of a pretest, a total of 10 hours theoretical lectures followed by a problem based learning meeting, observational studies in the clinical setting (two 24-hour emergency service observations including night shift works, 12-hour cardiology clinic, 2-hour intensive care unit observations), preparation of personal impression reports about the clinic observations, attendance meetings to discuss clinic observations, presentations of articles and case reports on shock physiopathology, presentation of an individually prepared project and a post-test. The aim of this study was to define students' views on different teaching methods applied in the elective on shock physiopathology. Materials and methods: The study was carried out using case analysis design of qualitative study designs. The data were collected using three different qualitative collection techniques (triangulation: individual and focus group interview, document review). Individual interviews and focus group interviews were conducted with volunteer participants. Nine questions were prepared by researches. Face-to-face interviews and focus interviews were conducted with audio and video recordings. Qualitative data set; document analysis, descriptive analysis and content analysis techniques. Results: 25 students (52% female, 48% male) who volunteered for individual and focus group interviews were initially satisfied with elective module (68%), the module was found different (40%) student centered (36%) and permanent (44%). Participants stated that briefly expressing the basic and clinical features of subjects by teachers from different departments supported the permanency. Students indicated that active learning methods in this module encouraged them to research (64%) and gained academic research skills (28%). Conclusion: When evaluated from the perspective of the medical students, the elective module on shock physiopathology that contains less theoretical lectures and active learning methods provides satisfactory and permanent learning. Students described lectures as effective in terms of providing permanency. Active learning methods are described effective to gain academic research skills.

Where applicable, experiments conform with Society ethical requirements