ABSTRACT
Background: In neuropsychological assessment, the time taken by a subject or patient to respond tostimulus provides valuable information about processing in central and peripheral nervous system. Reactiontime is a simple and inexpensive method commonly used in cognitive and sport physiology to assess thesensory-motor performance of an individual.Objective: To compare and validate the baseline values of simple reaction time obtained using the PC 1000Hz reaction timer with Biopac® MP 36.Materials and Methods: 50 healthy subjects (32 males and 18 females) with age of 22.78±3.90 yrs andBMI of 24.820±3.59 kg/m2 participated. Visual (VRT) and auditory (ART) reaction time were estimated usingPC 1000 Hz reaction timer and Biopac® MP 36 separately for minimum of three trials each.Results: There was no significant difference found in ART and VRT values of the subjects estimated by PC1000 Hz and Biopac® MP 36. A strong significant (P<0.01) correlation was found in ART (r=0.92) and VRT(r=0.94) in between the devices. Bland Altman plot also showed that variations for VRT and ART were withinthe acceptable range.Conclusion: The present validation study recommend that the assessment of simple reaction time forauditory and visual stimulus by PC 1000 Hz reaction timer is reliable one and compared with other techniquesit has more advantages such as portable in nature and simplicity to use either in laboratory or in fieldoriented study for the evaluation of psychomotor and cognitive function.
ABSTRACT
Background: Application of basic science knowledge to clinical practice is the aim of first year undergraduate dental curriculum. To bring in application of basic science theory to the clinical dental application, a case based learning (CBL) approach has been tried among first year dental students. Materials and methods: Randomized control trial was conducted by grouping first year undergraduate dental students (N= 73) into traditional group (N=35) and CBL group (N=38). Conventional lecture was given to traditional group and case based lecture and small group discussion for CBL group facilitated by faculty. Pre and post tests were administered for both the groups. Perceptions on CBL approach were collected using a questionnaire. Results were analyzed using paired and unpaired ‘t’ test. Results: Test scores were expressed in mean ± SD. deviation. Post-tests scores of traditional - (7.5 ±1.6) and CBL (7.7±1.9) groups were significantly higher than pretest scores of traditional - (5.7 ± 1.4) and CBL (4.9 ± 1.7) groups. Attitude score showed positive perceptions for most of the parameters. Conclusion: The first time CBL approach for Physiology concept provoked interest among dental students. Participants felt the method involved them in active learning and they recommended this approach to other sessions as well. Recall of factual knowledge did not improve significantly over traditional method, but was equally effective.