ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Descriptive & Survey Study

Authors

Ataei   Gh.R. (1 )
Adel Mashhadsari   F. (* )






(* ) Medical Radiation Department, Paramedical Faculty, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran
(1 ) Medical Radiation Department, Paramedical Faculty, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran

Correspondence

Article History

Received:  October  6, 2014
Accepted:  January 18, 2015
ePublished:  March 15, 2015

BRIEF TEXT


… [1, 2] Clinical environment is an ideal environment for teaching and learning [3]. Despite the importance and necessity of the clinical training, teaching this lesson in Iranian higher education is associated with many problems. If we believe in determining the goals of clinical education as one of the most important components of the teaching process, we can investigate the training effectiveness in terms of learning and achieving educational goals through a survey of students and instructors [4].

The level of senior medical students’ un-satisfaction from training in clinical and public health sectors has been estimated between 38.1 and 85% [5]. On the factors affecting the quality of clinical learning, nursing teachers and students have not been satisfied in the facilities in the clinical teaching environments [6]. The quality of clinical education in nursing education is not desirable, and comments and ideas of students and teachers can be a key to assess the current situation, identifying the strengths and correcting pitfalls [7]. From the viewpoint of the medical students, clinical training is not desirable and needs to be revised in all aspects [8].

This study was performed to assess the level of satisfaction from clinical training course and the affective factors on its improvement in clinical departments of Babol University of Medical Sciences.

This is a descriptive cross-sectional study.

Clinical students and medical-radiation clinical students of Babol University of Medical Sciences were studied in the first semester of academic year 2013-14.

Sampling was done using census method. 80 students were studied.

Research tool was a questionnaire, of which formal and content validity were confirmed through consultation with experts in the clinical education and its reliability was calculated by Test-retest method. The questionnaire had three parts. The first section included demographic characteristics. The second part consisted of 8 questions about students 'attitude about clinical training with Likert rating scale (excellent, good, fair, weak and too weak) and the third part consisted of 15 questions relating to students' opinions about the situation and the quality of clinical training with "excellent to too weak " and "always to never" scales. Each item had a score of zero to 4. Information obtained after coding was entered into the SPSS 19 software. The relationship between the level of students` satisfaction in two domains including teachers’ performance and the quality of clinical training with the factors including gender and educational field was investigated through Chi-square test. The correlation between the type of training (field, training I and III) and the rate of overall satisfaction of clinical education was analyzed through one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Pearson correlation coefficient was used to compare between the overall satisfaction score of the clinical training with the scoring of final exam of the clinical training, satisfaction in the performance of the teacher and quality of clinical training.

From 80 students who had completed the questionnaire, 25 (31.3%) were male and 55 (68.8%) were female. The mean age of the students was 21.00± 2.10years. 33 (41.3%) had field clinical training course, 24 (30%) had clinical training course I and 23 (28.8 %) had clinical training course III. 63 (78.8%) of the students were studying in the field of radiology and 17 (21.3%) studying in the radiotherapy. Most of the students evaluated the overall situation of clinical training in the borderline of good and moderate. In the area of the quality of clinical training, the most level of satisfaction belonged to students’ transportation services (65%), number of hospitalized patients (56.25%) and outpatient (50%) referred to the teaching hospitals, and the lowest satisfaction belonged to the quality of medical equipment (1.25%) and sector facilities (2.5%) (Table 1). In comparison between the satisfaction levels in “teachers` performance” and “quality of clinical training” domains and “gender” and “field of study”, no significant correlation was observed (Table 2). The mean score of satisfaction in the performance of the teachers was 28.00± 5.10 (of 32), the mean score of satisfaction in the quality of clinical training was 33.00 ± 4.60 (of 60) and the mean score of overall satisfaction in the clinical training was 61.00± 4.60 (of 92). A significant correlation was observed between the levels of overall satisfaction in the clinical training and the students' test scores at the end of a training course. Students, who had a higher satisfaction in the clinical training course, achieved better scores in the final exam of the training course. Statistically significant correlation was observed between the overall satisfaction in the clinical training and satisfaction in the performance of teachers and the quality of clinical training. The correlation between overall satisfaction of the trainee and the type of training (field training, training I and training III) was, also, evaluated, and there was no significant correlation.

The students assessed the amenities in the sections poor (26.25%) and very poor (42.5%) and as one of the most important problems of clinical training. The subjects have shown the lowest level of satisfaction in the medical equipment and amenities [9]. 87% of the students assess the factor as a problem [10]. Lack of educational and welfare facilities and the quality and quantity of equipment in the hospital sectors are of the problems of clinical training from the viewpoints of the students [11].Another problem assessed by students was the lack of enough physical space in the sectors for the trainees. Lack of enough space for clinical training has been assessed as a problem in 37.3% of the cases [12]. Diversity of patients was good (32.5 %) and number of hospitalized and outpatients were excellent which indicated the satisfaction of students in these issues. This factor is considered as a basic issue in clinical training [13]. … [14] Most participants (60.4%) assessed the operation of the instructors at the optimum level (excellent and good). Similar results have been reported in clinical training of the field of medical records in Kashan University of Medical Sciences [15], Iran University of Medical Sciences [16] and Jahrom University [17]. The instructors play a crucial role in improving the quality of clinical training [18]. The approach of clinical instructors is very effective on the performance of the students [19]. Factors such as the level of mastery of the instructor on the training subject, the power of clear transfer of the contents and the presence of the instructors in educational institutions according to predetermined programs have been more effective on the students` satisfaction. The assessment of the students after completion of the course was partially considered by the students. 56.25% of the students were dissatisfied due to the lack of the explanatory sessions and considered this issue as the main cause of students` confusion in the sectors [20-22]. The behavior of patients with the trainee was often considered as proper, but the behavior of staffs with the trainee was not satisfactory from the view of the students. Staff insolence to the students and enforcement to perform the duties of staffs and lack of cooperation with the trainee were the problems mentioned by the students [14, 16].

Continuous attention and evaluation of educational authorizes in terms of direct supervision on the performance of the instructors, development of internet in the hospitals and to give attention to the staff about educational quality of the hospitals should be considered.

Non-declared

Clinical training of Radiation Medicine students requires supplying educational and welfare facilities (lounge, audiovisual equipment, etc.), holding explanatory sessions and changing the evaluation methods.

All participants are appreciated.

Non-declared

Ethics Council and the Research Council of Babol University of Medical Sciences have approved this study.

Research Deputy of Babol University of Medical Sciences paid the cost of the project.

TABLES and CHARTS

Show attach file


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Ataie M, Kolivand M, Almasi A, Pourmirza Kalhori R, Sabour B, Naderipour A, et al. Evaluation of achieving to course plan aims from the viewpoint of medical Clerkship at Kermanshah University of Medical Science in 2012. J Clin Rec Paramedical Sci. 2012;1(3):65-71. [Persian]
[2]Avizhgan M, Omid A, Dehghani M, Esmaeili A, Asilian A, Akhlaghi MR, et al. Determining minimum skill achievements in advanced clinical Clerkship (Externship) in school of medicine using Logbooks. Iranian J Med Educ. 2010;5(10):543-51. [Persian]
[3]Atack L, Comacu M, Kenny R, Labelle N, Miller D. Student and staff relationships in a clinical practice model: Impact on learning. J Nurs Educ.2000 Dec;39(9):387-92.
[4]Pourmirza Kalhori R, Razaziyan N, Naderipor A, Najafi F, Almasi A, Hasanpour Dehkordi A. Evaluation of students achieve educational goals of clinical medicineat Imam Reza Hospital, Kermanshah during the first semester of study 2007. J Med Sci Kermanshah. 2009;13(4):344-51. [Persian]
[5]Aziz A, Kazi A, Jahangeer A, Fatemi Z. Knowledge and skills in community oriented medical education (COME) self ratings of medical undergraduates in Karachi. J Pak Med Assoc. 2006;56(7): 313-17.
[6]Williams A, Wellard SJ, Bethune E. Assessing Australian undergraduate clinical Learning Collegian. Collegian. 2001;8(4):9-13.
[7]Tanomand A, Niknam F, Abdollazadeh F. Evaluation of environmental barriers in clinical education in viewpoints of instructors and nursing students. J Educ Dev Jondishapour. 2014;5(2):106-13. [Persian]
[8]Sharifi B, Ghafarian Shirazi HR, Momeninejad M, Saniee F, Hashemi N, Jabarnejad A, et al. A survey of the quality and quantity of clinical education from the viewpoint of medical students. J Jahrom Univ Med Sci. 2012;10(2):48-53. [Persian]
[9]Mortazavi SAA, Razmara A. Evaluation of clinical medical students satisfaction from teaching departments, emergency, outpatient centers within hospitals and outpatient centers within the Esfahan University of medical sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2002;14(3):49-52. [Persian]
[10]Delaram M, Salehiyan T. Productivity in clinical education from the nursing and midwifery students’ viewpoint. Iranian Q Educ Strateg. 2011;4(2):67-71. [Persian]
[11]Dehghani H, Dehghani Kh, Fallahzadeh H. The educational problems of clinical field training based on nursing teachers and last year nursing students view points. Iranian J Med Educ. 2005;5(1):24-33. [Persian]
[12]Abedini S, Abedini S, Aghamolaei T, Jomehzadeh A, Kamjoo A. Clinical education problems: The viewpoints of nursing and midwifery students in Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences. Hormozgan J Med Sci. 2009;12(4):249-53. [Persian]
[13]Saarikoski M, Leino-Kilip H. The clinical learning and supervision by staff nurse: Developing the instrument. Int J Nurs Stud. 2002;39(3):259-67.
[14]Hadizadeh F, Firoozi M, Shamaeyan Razavi N. Nursing and midwifery students perspective on clinical education in Gonabad University of Medical Sciences. Iranian J Med Educ. 2005;5(1):70-8. [Persian]
[15]Rouzbahani F, Sheykhtaheri A, Farzandipour M, Ranghraz Jeddi F, Mobarak Ghamsari Z. Evaluation of training educator’s performance from point of views of medical record students in Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Health Inf Manag. 2011;8(2):251-57. [Persian]
[16]Fasihiharandi T, Soltaniarabshahi SK, Tahami SA, Mohammadalizadeh S. Viewpoints of medical students about the quality of clinical education. J Qazvin Univ Med Sci. 2004;30(1):4-9. [Persian]
[17]Hojat M, Montaseri MA, Charkhandaz M. Comparison of the achievement of educational goals of clinical training of the first medical surgical nursing course by fixed and unfixed instructors. J Jahrom Univ Med Sci. 2011;9(1):22-29. [Persian]
[18]Salmani N, Amirian H. Comparsion between nursing students and trainers viewpoints about clinical education environment in Islamic Azad University of Yazd, in the year 2006. J Strides Dev Med Educ. 2006;3(1):11-18. [Persian]
[19]Forbes H. Clinical teachers’ approaches to nursing. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19(5-6):785-93.
[20]Barnsley L, Lyon PM, Ralston SJ, Hibbert EJ, Cunningham I, Gordon FC, et al. Clinical skills in junior medical officers: A comparison of self-reported confidence and observed competence. J Med Educ. 2004;38(4): 358-67.
[21]Aein F, Alhani F, Anoosheh M. The experiences of nursing students, instructors, and hospital administrators of nursing clerkship. Iran J Med Educ. 2010;9(3):191-9. [Persian]
[22]Zamanzad B, Moezzi M, Shirzad H. Rate of satisfaction and evaluation of medical students (interns and externs) from the quality of clinical education in the Shahre-kord university of medical sciences-2005. J Semnan Univ Med Sci. 2007;9(1):13-20. [Persian]