Why Not a Podcast? Assessing Narrative Audio and Written Curricula in Obstetrical Neurology.

Abstract

Medical podcasts have the potential to educate residents and fellows in specialized or uncommon disciplines, but the acceptability and benefits of educational podcasts are unclear. We compared knowledge acquisition and engagement of audio-only (podcast) versus written curricular formats and assessed podcast feasibility and uptake for teaching obstetrical neurology to residents and fellows. Key concepts in obstetrical neurology were developed into parallel case-based modules: written reviews and podcasts interwove patient and expert voices with narration. In 2017, we tested this curriculum among 60 volunteer residents and fellows in obstetrics and gynecology, neurology, emergency medicine, internal medicine, and family medicine training programs at a single institution. Participants took content-based pretests, were randomized, and then completed written (n = 32) or podcast (n = 28) modules, and finally, completed posttests and feedback questionnaires. Among all participants, there was an increase in immediate posttest scores compared with pretest scores (46 of 60, 77% ± 17% pretest versus 56 of 60, 93% ± 10% posttest, P < .05), with participants in the podcast and written groups performing equally well. However, listeners rated the podcasts somewhat higher than written materials in the areas of maintaining interest, enjoyability, entertaining, and desire for wider use. Written and podcast curricula improved immediate knowledge similarly, but the narrative-style podcasts were perceived as more enjoyable by residents and fellows from several specialties, suggesting narrative podcasting can be an engaging and feasible educational alternative for trainees to acquire information.