Fra bok til sengekant : Hvordan underviser våre fire universiteter medisinstudentene i klinisk medisin? Nasjonal spørreundersøkelse om klinisk undervisning i indremedisin og kirurgi.

• Main Authors: Danielsson, Kim, Wiggen, Nina Irene
• Other Authors: Olaf Gjerløw Aasland, Instituttsjef ved Legeforeningens Forskningsinstitutt. Reidar Tyssen, førsteamanuensis ved avdelning for medisinsk atferdsfag ved UIO
• Format: Master Thesis
• Language: Norwegian Bokmål
• Published: 2007
• Subjects: VDP::805; Bergen; Norway; Tromsø
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10852/29450; http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-15555

Abstract In this report we are looking into differences in clinical bedside teaching in the four medical faculties in Norway (Tromsø, Trondheim, Oslo, Bergen) and their university hospitals. We specified our research to surgery and internal medicine. A total of 883 students where included in our questionnaire. The students answered questions about five main themes which where group sizes, guidance, feedback, supervision and priorities within the clinical bedside teaching. Practical skills in surgery and internal medicine where evaluated by the students progression. Socio demographic facts, student facilities and discrimination where also included. 531 students, 60,1%, answered our questionnaire. A total of 10 different hospitals and 11 classes where included. Bergen had a significantly smaller group size (mean 6,5) than in the other faculties (total mean 7,0). This gave more advantages for the students in Bergen. A total of 18,6% of the students say they get too little guidance, Bergen has significantly less. 21,7% of the students say they get good supervision, Bergen has significantly fewer students saying this. All the hospitals in Oslo get better results than elsewhere concerning supervision. 38,6% of the students say they get too little feedback, students in Bergen has significantly less and there where big differences between the university hospitals. In bedside teaching there are only small differences concerning prioritizing. Training in practical skills had an expected progression towards end of medical school. The part of the students that had carried out practical skills varied depending on the procedure, some of these skills where done by very few students.