Use of problem-based learning in orthopaedics education: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

BackgroundCurrently, problem-based learning (PBL) has been widely used in many disciplines, but no systematic review has explored the advantages and disadvantages of PBL in orthopaedics education.MethodsWe searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Chongqing VIP Database (VIP), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases up to April 2023 to identify for relevant studies. Relevant studies were identified by using specific eligibility criteria, and data were extracted.ResultsA total of 51 randomized controlled trials with 4268 patients were included. Compared with traditional education, PBL teaching yielded significantly higher knowledge scores (SMD=1.10, 95% CI: 0.78~1.41, P<0.00001), procedural skill scores and clinical skill scores than traditional teaching (SMD=2.07, 95% CI: 1.61~2.53, P<0.00001; SMD=1.20, 95% CI: 0.88~1.52, P<0.00001). Moreover, the total scores were higher in the PBL teaching group than in the traditional teaching group (MD=5.69, 95% CI: 5.11~6.26, P<0.00001). Students also expressed higher levels of interest and satisfaction in the PBL teaching group than in the traditional teaching group (OR=4.70, 95% CI: 3.20~6.93, P<0.00001; OR=5.43, 95% CI: 3.83~7.69, P<0.00001). However, there was less learning time and higher levels of learning pressure in the PBL teaching group (OR=0.12, 95% CI: 0.06~0.24, P<0.00001; OR=5.95, 95% CI: 3.16~11.23, P<0.00001).ConclusionCurrent evidence indicates that PBL teaching can increase knowledge scores, procedural skill scores, and clinical skill scores. Students have higher levels of interest in teaching and higher levels of teaching satisfaction in the PBL group. However, students can feel higher levels of study pressure and experience less study time. The findings of the current study need to be further verified in multicentre, double-blind and large-sample RCTs.