The sudden switch to online communication training after 10 years in the classroom - comparing the evaluation results of a course on doctor-patient communication.

Objective: The aim of the study was to find out whether it is possible to successfully convert a communication course for around 400 students to a blended-learning format (asynchronous theoretical course/synchronous digital practical course). The main focus thereby was on assessing subjective learning progress and the extent to which the importance of communication and doctor-patient communication can be conveyed online. The study is based on the results of an evaluation of the opinions of both the students and the lecturers that participated in the course. Methods: The students, who were in their fourth preclinical semester in 2020, were asked to fill in a self-assessment sheet at the beginning of the course, and following its completion. The feedback provided by the lecturers was also assessed. In order to compare the results and identify possible discrepancies, the corresponding self-assessment and evaluation results for the past 10 years (stemming from traditional classroom courses) were also taken into account. Results: Participants in the online courses reported distinct subjective learning progress, and greater progress than was reported for traditional courses in previous years. The suitability of the online format was viewed critically by both students and lecturers, while the course atmosphere was seen positively. The relevance of doctor-patient communication was assessed particularly highly in the online format. Conclusion: Based on the results of the evaluation, the experience gained from the blended-learning format will be included into future iterations of the communication course at Goethe University Frankfurt. The results have shown that doctor-patient communication can be learned well online. This format can therefore be recommended for new learning concepts in the future.

Learning how to conduct medical interviews online for the first time - this is what we learned in Frankfurt am Main.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic made it necessary to convert a course on history taking, in theory and practice, to an online format over a very short time. A key question was whether, and if so to what extent, basic theory and, in particular, the practical skills required to conduct medical interviews can be learned online. Methodology/project description: The teaching program in basic theory was didactically redesigned and asynchronously placed on a learning platform, while the practical program, which consisted of training in conducting history-taking interviews, took place with the help of video conferencing software during synchronous sessions. For the practical sessions, the lecturers received organizational and technical support. Results: Based on initial evaluation results, a positive picture of the conversion has emerged since the course was completed. The need to restructure the course and use new teaching methods because of the COVID-19 pandemic was well accepted by lecturers and students, and the course content was successfully adapted to an online format. Conclusion: Overall, the online format enabled the learning objectives of the course to be successfully achieved. For topics such as non-verbal communication, the evaluation results indicated that a classroom format is preferable. Asynchronous theory teaching was generally very well received. Blended learning formats thus represent an appropriate means of teaching how to conduct medical interviews. Overall, online courses on conducting medical interviews provide students with the opportunity to become acquainted with the use of digital formats to conduct doctor-patient interviews, and to develop the relevant skills.

Comparative evaluation of the FilmArray meningitis/encephalitis molecular panel in a pediatric population.

We compared an FDA cleared molecular meningitis/encephalitis panel to lab developed viral PCRs and bacterial culture. Of the 67 viral PCR or bacterial culture-positive samples, 92.5% were positive for the same target by the panel. Of the 66 negative samples tested, no targets were detected by the panel, for an agreement of 96.2%.