Original Article

Quantifying Efficacy of Video Interventions about Adverse Events in Medical Student Education

Authors: Eric Wahlstedt, BS, Brittany Levy, MD, MPH, William Cranford, BS, MS, Adam Dugan, BS, PhD, Justin Ziemba, MD, MEd, Andrew Harris, MD

Abstract

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic catalyzed a rapid shift toward remote learning in medicine. This study hypothesized that using videos on adverse events and patient safety event reporting systems could enhance education and motivation among healthcare professionals, leading to improved performance on quizzes compared with those exposed to standard, in-person lectures.

Methods: Participants were randomly assigned to a group both watching the video and attending an in-person lecture or a group that received only the in-person lecture in this study performed in 2022. Surveys gathered demographic information, tested knowledge, and identified barriers to reporting adverse events.

Results: A total of 83 unique participants responded to the survey out of the 130 students enrolled (64%; 83/130). Among the students completing all of the surveys, the group who watched the Osmosis video had a higher average quiz score (6.46/7) than the lecture group (6.31/7) following the first intervention. Only 25% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they knew what to include in a patient safety report and only 10% agreed or strongly agreed that they knew how to access the reporting system.

Conclusions: This study suggests virtual preclass video learning can be a beneficial tool to complement traditional lecture-based learning in medical education. Further research is needed to determine the efficacy of long-term video interventions in adverse events.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Stoehr F, Müller L, Brady A, et al. How COVID-19 kick-started online learning in medical education—the DigiMed study. Saqr M, ed. PLoS One 2021;16:e0257394.
 
2. Bordes SJ, Walker D, Modica LJ, etal. Towards the optimal use of video recordings to support the flipped classroom in medical school basic sciences education. Med Educ Online 2021;26: 1841406.
 
3. Pierce R, Fox J. Vodcasts and active-learning exercises in a “flipped classroom” model of a renal pharmacotherapy module. Am J Pharm Educ 2012;76:196.
 
4. Grand D, Schuster VL, Pullman JM, et al. Medical student experience and outcomes, as well as preceptor experience, with rapid conversion of a preclinical medical school course to a remote-based learning format in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. Med Sci Educ 2021; 31:1895–1901.
 
5. Kahn JM, Fields EC, Pollom E, et al. Increasing medical student engagement through virtual rotations in radiation oncology. Adv Radiat Oncol 2021;6:100538.
 
6. Pellegrini VD, Franks AM, Englander R. Finding greater value in the fourth year of medical school: accelerating the transition to residency. Acad Med 2020;95:527–533.
 
7. Elnicki DM, Gallagher S, Willett L, et al. Course offerings in the fourth year of medical school: how U.S. medical schools are preparing students for internship. Acad Med 2015;90: 1324–1330.
 
8. Dysinger WS, Pappas JM. A fourth-year medical school rotation inquality, patient safety, and population medicine. Am J Prev Med 2011;41:S200–S205.
 
9. Walton M, Woodward H, Van Staalduinen S, et al. The WHO patient safety curriculum guide for medical schools. BMJ Qual Saf 2010;19:542–546.
 
10. Schwendimann R, Blatter C, Dhaini S, et al. The occurrence, types, consequences and preventability of in-hospital adverse events– a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:521.
 
11. Milch CE, Salem DN, Pauker SG, et al. Voluntary electronic reporting of medical errors and adverse events. An analysis of 92,547 reports from 26 acute care hospitals. J Gen Intern Med 2006;21:165–170.
 
12. Evans SM. Attitudes and barriers to incident reporting: a collaborative hospital study. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:39–43.
 
13. Saleh A, Bista K. Examining factors impacting online survey response rates in educational research: perceptions of graduate students. JMultidiscipEval2017;13:63–74.
 
14. Zhu J, Yuan H, Zhang Q, et al. The impact of short videos on student performance in an online-flipped college engineering course. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 2022;9:327.
 
15. Förster M, Maur A, Weiser C, et al. Pre-class video watching fosters achievement and knowledge retention in a flipped classroom. Comput Educ 2022;179:104399.
 
16. Rosi-Schumacher M, DeGiovanni JC. Using the lessons of learning science to improve medical education in otolaryngology. Ear Nose Throat J 2022;101(9_Suppl):16S–19S.
 
17. Jape D, Zhou J, Bullock S. A spaced-repetition approach to enhance medical student learning and engagement in medical pharmacology. BMC Med Educ 2022;22:337.
 
18. Bertsch S, Pesta BJ, Wiscott R, et al. The generation effect: a meta-analytic review. Mem Cognit 2007;35:201–210.
 
19. Riddell J, Jhun P, Fung CC, et al. Does the flipped classroom improve learning in graduate medical education? J Grad Med Educ 2017;9:491–496.
 
20. Szymusiak J, Walk TJ, Benson M, et al. A qualitative analysis of resident adverse event reporting: what’s holding us back. Am J Med Qual 2020;35:155–162.
 
21. Lawton R. Barriers to incident reporting in a healthcare system. Qual Saf Health Care 2002; 11:15–18.