Learning by Clinical Reasoning Versus Interactive Lecture: An Analytical and Experimental Study of Teaching Urological Emergencies

Abstract

To scrutinize the progression of clinical reasoning and theoretical knowledge by comparing the impact of Clinical Reasoning-Based Learning (CRBL) sessions with interactive lectures (IL). In this experimental study conducted from November 15, 2021, to May 7, 2022, we focused on second-year students in the second cycle of medical studies. Four specific urologic emergency scenarios (nephritic colic, macroscopic hematuria, acute scrotal pain, and urinary incontinence in men) were selected for interactive teaching sessions. Four groups were studied. One urology item was taught via CRBL, the rest via IL. Each item was taught once with CRBL and thrice with IL. After instruction, learners took a 10-point evaluative test with multiple-choice questions and clinical scenarios. Four groups of 14 learners attended our department, for a total number of 56 participants. Each student attended 4 learning sessions (1 CRBL session and 3 ILs) with a number of tests completed at 4 for each. The total number of tests taken was 224. The scoring of each test was out of 10 with theoretical scores between 0 and 10. The overall median score was 7/10. We noted better ratings after the CRBL sessions (n=56) with a median of 8/10 [4-10] compared to the IL sessions (n=168) whose median was 6 [3-10] with a significant difference between the 2 learning methods (P<.001). The CRBL sessions were significantly better than the ILs at developing the clinical reasoning and theoretical knowledge in urology of our medical students.