Innovation in surgical curriculum teaching methodology: vertical integration revisited

Manmeet Kaur; Alok V. Mathur

doi:10.18203/2349-2902.isj20180450

Authors

Manmeet Kaur Department of Surgery, Shri Guru Ram Rai Medical and Health Institute, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India
Alok V. Mathur Department of Surgery, Shri Guru Ram Rai Medical and Health Institute, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20180450

Keywords:

Curriculum, Thyroid, Vertical integration

Abstract

Background: Vertical integration refers to the learning of basic sciences in the context of clinical and professional practice. It has been seen to be more meaningful and relevant to students. Objective of the study was to design and implement a vertically integrated module for teaching thyroid surgery in a modified way to the MBBS students at Shri Guru Ram Rai Institute of Health and Medical Sciences, Dehradun.

Methods: Study was conducted in the Department of Surgery. A total of 200 students (50 each from four batches of MBBS at SGRRIH and MS, Dehradun), were enrolled to the same teaching modalities, materials and evaluation tools. At the end of the teaching lectures, a feedback questionnaire was filled by the students. Thirty MCQs were given both in pre and post session and results compared.

Results: Feedback from students was very encouraging. In MCQ assessment, pre-session only 40% secured marks in the pass range, where as in the post session questionnaire, 89% passed and 11% failed only marginally.

Conclusions: Vertical integration needs additional effort, time and teamwork from faculty members of different departments. It is useful to have smaller topics of clinical significance covered in one session rather than attempting to cover a broad area, as this often results in a loss of interest. Preparation of curriculum together by basic, preclinical and clinical teachers can lead to more relevant teaching.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Ginzberg E. The reforms of medical education: an outsider reflection Acad Med. 1993;68:518-9.

Dahle LO, Brynhildsen J, Fallsberg MB, Rundquist I, Hammar M. Pros and cons of vertical integration between clinical medicine and basic science within a problem-based undergraduate medical curriculum: examples and experiences from Linköping, Sweden. Medical teacher. 2002;24(3):280-5.

Paul B, Karen M. Integration of basic and clinical sciences AMEE (Association for Medical Education in Europe, 2008).

Alberta Education Guide. Primary Programs Framework Curriculum Integration: Making Connections. Alberta Education, Alberta, Canada 2007.

Wilkerson L, Stevens CM, Krasne S. No content without context: integrating basic, clinical, and social sciences in a pre-clerkship curriculum. Med Teacher. 2009;31(9):812-21.

Malik AS, Malik RH. Twelve tips for developing an integrated curriculum. Med Teacher. 2011;33(2):99-104.

Rafique N. Importance of vertical integration in teaching and assessment of physiological concepts. J Taibah Univ. 2014;9:282-8.

Sathishkumar S, Thomas N, Tharion E, Neelakantan N, Vyas R. Attitude of medical students towards early clinical exposure in learning endocrine physiology. BMC Medical Education. 2007;7(1):30.

Glasgow NJ, Trumble S. Final report on the case studies on vertical integration for the AAAGP/ADGP GPET working party. Book Final Report on the Case Studies of Vertical Integration for the AAAGP/ADGP GPET Working Party. 2003.

Foote AM. Medical education registrars: new thoughts on old problems. Med J Australia. 2007 Apr 16;186(8):431-2.

McGrath BP, Graham IS, Crotty BJ, Jolly BC. Lack of integration of medical education in Australia: the need for change. Med J Australia. 2006;184(7):346.

Dick M, King DB, Mitchel GK, Kelly GD, Buckley JF, Garside SJ. Vertical Integration in Teaching and Learning (VITAL): an approach to medical education in general practice. Med J Australia. 2007;187(2):133.