E-Learning versus Classroom Learning for Acquiring Knowledge about Precarity in Medicine

Research Article

J Fam Med. 2021; 8(4): 1255.

E-Learning versus Classroom Learning for Acquiring Knowledge about Precarity in Medicine

Lachenal M1, Tanguy G2, Dessene P3, Rude M4, Doly L4, Laurenson C3, Gosgnach M5, Clement G2, Hersart De La Villemarque A3, Ouchchane L6 and Lesens O1,3*

1Service des maladies infectieuses et tropicales, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand, Centre de Référence des Infections Ostéo-articulaires, Centre de Référence Régional des Maladies Vectorielles liées aux Tiques, Laboratoire Microorganismes Génome et Environnement, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France

2Department of General Practice, Institut Pascal, CNRS, SIGMA Clermont, Clermont Auvergne University, Clermont-Ferrand, France

3Médecins du Monde, délégation Auvergne Rhône-Alpes, Programme RESCORDA, Lyon, France

4Dispensaire émile Roux, Centre de lutte antituberculeuse (CLAT 63), Clermont-Ferrand, France

5Pôle (Ingénierie Pédagogique et Production Audiovisuelle (IPPA), Direction de la Formation, programme Learn'in Auvergne pour l'innovation pédagogique, Université Clermont Auvergne, site Carnot, 49 Boulevard François Mitterrand, Clermont-Ferrand Cedex 1, France

6Université Clermont Auvergne, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, CNRS, SIGMA Clermont, Institut Pascal, Clermont-Ferrand, France; Département de Santé Publique, Unité de Biostatistique et Informatique Médicale, CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France

*Corresponding author: Lesens O, Service des maladies infectieuses et tropicales, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand, Centre de Référence des Infections Ostéo-articulaires, Centre de Référence Régional des Maladies Vectorielles Liées Aux Tiques, Laboratoire Microorganismes Génome et Environnement, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France

Received: April 16, 2021; Accepted: June 02, 2021; Published: June 09, 2021

Abstract

The effect on knowledge levels immediately after a course on precarity in family medicine was assessed by comparing online learning against classroom learning, both followed by time for face-to-face discussion. Of 87 family medicine interns of the same class, 65 took part in the study and were evaluated, 34 being assigned to classroom learning and 31 to online learning. The increase in knowledge after the course was significantly higher in the online learning group (+27.8 points±11.2) than in the classroom group (+9.1 points±9.0) (p<0.0001).

Keywords: Online learning; Precarity; Family practice

Abbreviations

CNIL: Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés; SD: Standard Deviation; T0: Test before the course; T1: Test immediately after the course

Background

Patients living in precarity have poorer health as well as poorer access to healthcare and disease prevention [1,2]. What's more, their management requires a blend of medical and social care which students have little training in. The use of online courses is gaining ground in initial and continuing medical education. Online learning maximizes the number of people who can be trained while minimizing training time. It also allows the learner to follow their course at times and locations of their choosing, with their learning made easier through illustrations and interactive links [3]. Online learning’s cost-effectiveness is one advantage sometimes put forward, but it has rarely been studied [4]. Drawbacks include non-completion of the course, geographical isolation and poor interfaces. In a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of online learning among health professionals in 2008 [5], Cook et al. found it to be superior to no training at all but not significantly better than a lecture. Only a few authors have found online courses to be more effective than classroom-based ones [6,7].

Objective

Few learning resources are available to French medical students regarding the management of patients facing precarity. The result is poor knowledge of the issue and inappropriate management. Using a pragmatic approach, this study aimed to develop an online course and evaluate its effect on knowledge levels immediately after the course by comparing it against a classroom lecture.

Methods

We used a pragmatic approach to compare two groups of medical students in a prospective comparative single-center study. Approval was obtained from the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL), a data protection agency, and the Sud-Est VI Clermont-Ferrand institutional review board. The online and classroom courses were put together by a committee of experts and a team of trainers. All family medicine interns of the class of 2016 (n=87) were invited to attend a course entitled "Health and Precarity" on March 21, 2019. The classroom and online learning groups were determined by alphabetical order. A time for discussion with the trainers was organized after the course for both groups. The online course was organized in the computer room of the faculty. Knowledge was assessed through a questionnaire involving 18 multiple-choice questions devised and validated by the expert committee. Of these 18 questions, 6 tested general knowledge of precarity in medicine (subgroup 1), 8 related to existing support services and benefits (subgroup 2) and 4 went back over specific cases of precarity in medicine (migrant patients, unaccompanied minors, etc.) (subgroup 3). In both groups, the questionnaires were given to the students before the training course (T0) and then immediately afterward (T1). The primary endpoint was improvement after the course, defined as the difference in points achieved on the questionnaires between T1 and T0. The secondary endpoint was the interns' satisfaction with the type of training. Statistical analyses were conducted using SAS 9.4® software at a two-tailed significance level of 5%. Quantitative variables were compared using Student's t-test, while any association between two quantitative variables was compared using Pearson's linear correlation coefficient.

Results

Pre-training knowledge was similar in the two groups (Table 1). The increase in knowledge after training was significant regardless of the type of training taken. It was higher in the online learning group (+27.8 points±11.2) than in the classroom group (+9.1 points±9.0 (p<0.0001) (Figure 1).

Citation:Lachenal M, Tanguy G, Dessene P, Rude M, Doly L, Laurenson C, et al. E-Learning versus Classroom Learning for Acquiring Knowledge about Precarity in Medicine. J Fam Med. 2021; 8(4): 1255.