Abstract

ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare a newly designed graphical educational game (GEG) with a case-based learning (CBL) exercise and to enhance our ability to apply physiological knowledge of the cardiac cycle to diagnose cardiac valvular diseases among preclinical medical students. MethodsIn this interventional study, first-year undergraduate medical students were randomly assigned to a GEG group (n = 42) and a CBL group (n = 37). The GEG group involved shading cardiac cycle graphs and pressure–volume loops while the CBL group worked on two cases of cardiac valve diseases. A multiple-choice question (MCQ) test was then used to assess conceptual understanding of the cardiac cycle. After brief exposure to murmur auscultation on a simulator manikin, the groups were assessed in a simulator manikin test for their ability to diagnose cardiac valve disease. Median MCQ scores and mean scores in the simulator test were then compared using the Mann–Whitney U test. The student's perspectives of the GEG and simulation session were acquired on a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire. ResultsThe GEG group had significantly higher median MCQ scores (p < 0.001) and mean simulator test scores (p < 0.001) when compared to the CBL group. Moreover, 91% of students agreed that the GEG helped them to clarify concepts, and 88% agreed that the concepts and knowledge gained through the GEG helped them to diagnose valve disease in the manikins. ConclusionThe GEG was positively received by students and was more useful than the CBL in enhancing the application of cardiac physiology concepts and improving diagnostic ability in a simulated clinical setting.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call