| 1. |
- Edelbring, Samuel, 1969-, et al.
(author)
-
Integrating virtual patients into courses: follow-up seminars and perceived benefit
- 2012
-
In: Medical Education. - : Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Inc.. - 0308-0110 .- 1365-2923. ; 46:4, s. 417-425
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Context: The use of virtual patients (VPs) suggests promising effects on student learning. However, currently empirical data on how best to use VPs in practice are scarce. More knowledge is needed regarding aspects of integrating VPs into a course, of which student acceptance is one key issue. Several authors call for looking beyond technology to see VPs in relation to the course context. The follow-up seminar is proposed as an important aspect of integration that warrants investigation.Methods: A cross-sectional explanatory study was performed in a clinical clerkship introduction course at four teaching hospitals affiliated to the same medical faculty. The VP-related activities were planned collaboratively by teachers from all four settings. However, each setting employed a different strategy to follow up the activity in the course. Sixteen questionnaire items were grouped into three scales pertaining to: perceived benefit of VPs; wish for more guidance on using VPs, and wish for assessment and feedback on VPs. Scale scores were compared across the four settings, which were ranked according to the level of intensity of students processing of cases during VP follow- up activities.Results: The perceived benefit of VPs and their usage were higher in the two intense-use settings compared with the moderate-and lowintensity settings. The wish for more guidance was high in the low-and one of the highintensity settings. Students in all settings displayed little interest in more assessment and feedback regarding VPs.Conclusions: High case processing intensity was related to positive perceptions of the benefit of VPs. However, the low interest in more assessment and feedback on the use of VPs indicates the need to clearly communicate the added value of the follow-up seminar. The findings suggest that a more intense follow-up pays off in terms of the benefit perceived by students. This study illustrates the need to consider VPs from the perspective of a holistic course design and not as isolated add‐ons.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mohammad, Moman A., et al.
(author)
-
Intravenous beta-blocker therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention is not associated with benefit regarding short-term mortality : a Swedish nationwide observational study
- 2017
-
In: EuroIntervention. - : Europa Edition. - 1774-024X .- 1969-6213. ; 13:2, s. E210-E218
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: Our aim was to investigate the impact of intravenous (IV) beta-blocker therapy on short-term mortality and other in-hospital events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods and results: Using the nationwide Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) registry, we identified all patients with STEMI undergoing PCI between 2006 and 2013. Patients with cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest at presentation were excluded. The primary endpoint was mortality within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were in-hospital events (mortality, cardiogenic shock and left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] <40% at discharge). We adjusted for confounders with a multivariable model and propensity score matching. Out of 16,909 patients, 2,876 (17.0%) were treated with an IV beta-blocker. After adjusting for confounders, the IV beta-blocker group had higher 30-day all-cause mortality (HR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.14-1.83), more in-hospital cardiogenic shock (OR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.09-2.16) and were more often discharged with an LVEF <40% (OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.51-1.92).Conclusions: In this large nationwide observational study, the use of IV beta-blockers in patients with STEMI treated with primary PCI was associated with higher short-term mortality, lower LVEF at discharge, as well as a higher risk of in-hospital cardiogenic shock.
|
|
