IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0233748.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The AaLplus near-peer teaching program in Family Medicine strengthens basic medical skills—A five-year retrospective study

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Schwill
  • Jan Hundertmark
  • Johanna Fahrbach-Veeser
  • Christiane Eicher
  • Pencho Tonchev
  • Sonia Kurczyk
  • Joachim Szecsenyi
  • Svetla Loukanova

Abstract

Background: Basic medical skills such as history taking and physical examination are essential components of clinical work profiles, but nevertheless have been neglected by conventional preclinical curricula. The near-peer-teaching program AaLplus [living anatomy plus] teaches basic medical skills, especially history taking, physical examination, and venepuncture, to preclinical students. It is a highly popular compulsory course in the first four semesters (320 students/year, 9h/semester) at Heidelberg University and ends with a formative Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) during which students receive structured in-depth feedback on their performance. AaLplus is part of the Department of General Practice’s longitudinal curriculum for Family Medicine. Objectives: This study aims to assess whether the AaLplus program has positive effects on students’ clinical skill development and subjective confidence in history taking, physical examination and venepuncture. Methods: From 2015 to 2019, we asked all AaLplus participants to rate the program and self-assess their medical skills on 5-point Likert scales (min 1, max 5). In 4-station OSCEs, trained tutors rated the students’ performance in all taught skills using standardized checklists. Results: From 2015 to 2019 n = 1534 questionnaires returned (response rate = 98.6%, 52.7% females). After course completion, students felt able to take a patient’s history (mean 3.97, SD = 0.75) and perform physical examinations (means range 3.82–4.36, SDs range 0.74–0.89) as well as venepuncture (mean 4.12, SD = 0.88). A large majority of students claimed they acquired these skills in the AaLplus program. During OSCE, 81.9% passed anamnesis, 93.1% passed physical examination, and 95.4% passed venepuncture (of n = 1556). Students mostly rated the feedback they received during the OSCE as “helpful” or “very helpful” (means for different stations 4.69–4.76, SDs 0.50–0.70). Conclusions: AaLplus is a positive example of a peer teaching program in the preclinical stage of medical studies. It successfully trains junior students in essential medical abilities and increases their confidence in their skills. A high percentage of students pass the formative OSCE and evaluate it positively. Consistently high ratings indicate the program’s routine viability. Further studies are needed to analyze if programs like AaLplus could have an impact on the number of graduates choosing career in Family Medicine.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Schwill & Jan Hundertmark & Johanna Fahrbach-Veeser & Christiane Eicher & Pencho Tonchev & Sonia Kurczyk & Joachim Szecsenyi & Svetla Loukanova, 2020. "The AaLplus near-peer teaching program in Family Medicine strengthens basic medical skills—A five-year retrospective study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233748
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233748
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233748
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233748&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0233748?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233748. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.