Gamificación en la docencia de dermatología / Gamification in Dermatology teaching

Casi todos nosotros, como profesores universitarios, abusamos de las clases magistrales basadas en presentaciones con PowerPoint, empleando todo el tiempo de la clase exclusivamente en trasmitir información para que nuestros alumnos la memoricen. Cada vez más alumnos experimentan estas clases teóricas como una experiencia somnífera, aburrida y pasiva. La gamificación, o game based learning, puede impulsar la motivación y el aprendizaje combinando dinámicas con contenidos a medida y tecnología interactiva con resultados y feedback en tiempo real. Tiene la capacidad de generar un formato lúdico y atractivo, potenciar la participación activa, el debate y la reflexión en el aula, promover las relaciones entre los asistentes y mejorar la retención de mensajes clave o conocimientos que se quieran transmitir. Desde hace dos años, en la unidad docente de Basurto de la Facultad de Medicina y Enfermería de la Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea utilizamos dos herramientas para 'gamificar' nuestra docencia en la asignatura de Dermatología de 4.º curso de Medicina: Socrative(R) y Trivinet(R)

Almost all of us, as university professors, abuse the presentation-based master classes with 'PowerPoint' employing all class time, exclusively in the transmission of the information to be memory- learned. For a growing part of the students the theory class is a sleepy experience, boring and passive. Gamification or 'Game Based Learning' can boost motivation and learning by combining dynamics with tailored content and interactive technology with results and feedback in real time. They have the ability to create a playful and attractive format, promote active participation, debate and reflection in the classroom, promote relationships between attendees and improve the retention of key messages or knowledge that you want to transmit. For 2 years, in the Basurto teaching unit of the Faculty of Medicine and Nursing of the University of the Basque Country (UPV) we have used 2 tools to 'gamify' our teaching in the subject of Dermatology in the 4th year of Medicine: Socrative(R) and Trivinet(R)

Cost of early-stage mycosis fungoides treatments in Spain.

AIM: To identify the most common therapeutic options for the treatment of early-stage mycosis fungoides in Spain, quantify their associated healthcare resource use and costs. METHODS: After reviewing the literature, a panel of 6 Spanish clinical dermatologists validated the treatments and healthcare resource use through a structured questionnaire. Individual responses were collected, analyzed and presented into a face-to-face meeting in order to reach a consensus. Cost categories considered were: drug acquisition and administration, photo/radiotherapy session and maintenance, clinical follow-up visits and laboratory tests. Costs were expressed in euros from 2018. The Spanish National Health System perspective was considered, taking into account direct health costs and time horizons of 1, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Costs for the skin-directed treatments (SDT) assessed at 1, 3 and 6 months, were: Topical carmustine [€6,593.36, €19,780.09 and €27,592.78]; Phototherapy with psoralens and ultraviolet A light (PUVA) [€1,098.68, €2,999.99 and €3,187.60]; Narrow-band ultraviolet B phototherapy [€1,657.47, €4,842.10 and €4,842.10]; Total skin electron beam therapy (TSEBT) [€6,796.45, €7,913.34 and €7,913.34]. Cost for topical corticosteroids, being considered an adjuvant option, were €17.16, €51.49 and €102.97. Costs for the assessed systemic treatments alone or in combination with SDT at 1, 3 and 6 months, were: Systemic retinoids [€2,026.03, €5,206.63 and €7,426.42]; Systemic retinoids + PUVA phototherapy [€3,066.50, €8,271.26 and €10,046.58]; Interferon alfa + PUVA phototherapy [€1,541.09, €5,167.57 and €6,404.55]. CONCLUSION: According to the Spanish clinical practice, phototherapies in monotherapy were the treatments with the lowest associated costs regardless of the time horizon considered. TSEBT turned out as the treatment with the highest associated costs when considering 1 month. However, while considering 3 and 6 months the treatment with the highest associated costs was topical carmustine. The results of this analysis may provide critical information to measure the disease burden, to detect unmet medical needs and to advocate towards better treatments for this rare disease.