Face-to-face versus online training for the interpretation of findings in the fiberoptic endoscopic exam of the swallow procedure
Received 31 May 2017
Accepted for publication 27 February 2018
Published 12 June 2018 Volume 2018:9 Pages 433—441
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Md Anwarul Majumder
Susan L Brady,1 Noel Rao,2 Patricia J Gibbons,3 Letha Williams,4 Mark Hakel,5 Theresa Pape6
1Quality and Research Department, Marianjoy Rehabilitation Hospital, Wheaton, IL, USA; 2Medical Residency Department, Marianjoy Rehabilitation Hospital, Wheaton, IL, USA; 3Department of Speech Language Pathology, Midwestern University, Downers Grove, IL, USA; 4Health Administration, College of Graduate Health Studies, A.T. Still Medical University, Kirksville, MO, USA; 5Education and Staff Development, Madonna Rehabilitation Hospital, Lincoln, NE, USA; 6Hines Veterans Administration Hospital, Hines, IL, USA
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of an online, interdisciplinary, interactive course designed to increase the ability to accurately interpret the fiberoptic endoscopic exam of the swallow (FEES) procedure to traditional, face-to-face (F2F) lectures for both graduate medical education (GME) and graduate speech language pathology (GSLP) programs.
Design: This was a prospective, quantitative, nonrandomized study. Participants were medical residents in physical medicine and rehabilitation from two affiliated programs and graduate students in speech language pathology from two instructional cohorts at a single institution. Group 1, traditional group (n=51), participated in F2F lectures using an audience response system, whereas Group 2, online group (n=57), participated in an online, interactive course. The main outcome measure was pre- and post-course FEES knowledge test scores.
Results: For Group 1, the mean pre-course score was 26.94 (SD=3.24) and the post-course score was 34.96 (SD=2.51). Differences between pre- and post-course scores for Group 1 were significant (t=−16.38, P≤0.0001). For Group 2, the mean pre-course score was 27.05 (SD=2.74) and the post-course score was 34.05 (SD=2.84). Differences between pre- and post-course scores for Group 2 were significant (t=−13.5, P≤0.0001). The mean knowledge change score for Group 1 and Group 2 was 8.01 (SD=3.50) and 7.04 (SD=3.91), respectively (nonsignificant, t=1.372, P=0.173), suggesting groups made similar gains.
Conclusion: Incorporating technology into GME and GSLP programs yielded comparable gains to traditional lectures. Findings support the use of online education as a viable alternative to the traditional F2F classroom format for the instruction of the cognitive component of the FEES procedure.
Keywords: deglutition, dysphagia, endoscopy, swallowing, training, medical education
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]