Application of bilingual simulated patients in the medical history collection for international medical students in China

In all international medical student (IMS) programs in China, language barriers between IMSs and Chinese patients greatly reduced the learning in clinical practice and brought great challenges to IMSs in their transition from preclinical to clinical practice. This study aimed to investigate the role...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC medical education 2023-07, Vol.23 (1), p.525-525, Article 525
Hauptverfasser: Zou, Liping, Su, Juan, Li, Jiao, Wang, Jing, Kang, Jian, Yin, Anning, Ren, Haixia, Jiang, Xiaoda, Ding, Yijuan, An, Ping
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In all international medical student (IMS) programs in China, language barriers between IMSs and Chinese patients greatly reduced the learning in clinical practice and brought great challenges to IMSs in their transition from preclinical to clinical practice. This study aimed to investigate the role of bilingual simulated patients (B-SPs) in IMSs learning of medical history collection in China. 48 IMSs of grade 4 between October 2020 to Jan 2021 were enrolled in this study. During the training of medical history collection, students were randomly arranged into two groups trained with either B-SPs (B-SP group) or English-speaking SP (E-SP group). All SPs in Objective Structured Clinical Exam station (OSCE) were trained in the Affiliated Hospital of Wuhan University. Clinical skills in medical history collection were assessed by instructors during pre-clinical, post-clinical OSCE and clinical rotations. The scores of IMSs in each group were analyzed in terms of medical history collection including the ability to effectively consult for information and key communication skills related to patient care. Our results indicated that IMS in B-SP group obtained similar scores in preclinical training for history collection (67.3 ± 8.46 vs 67.69 ± 8.86, P 
ISSN:1472-6920
1472-6920
DOI:10.1186/s12909-023-04480-1