|
BMC Research Notes 2012
Do communication training programs improve students’ communication skills? - a follow-up studyAbstract: A sample of 32 randomly selected students performed an interview with a simulated patient before the communication course (pre-intervention) and a second interview after the course (post-intervention), using the Calgary-Cambridge Observation Guide (CCOG) to assess history taking ability.On average, the students improved in all of the 28 items of the CCOG. The 6 more technically-orientated communication items improved on average from 3.4 for the first interview to 2.6 in the second interview (p?<?0.0001), the 6 emotional items from 2.7 to 2.3 (p?=?0.023). The overall score for women improved from 3.2 to 2.5 (p?=?0.0019); male students improved from 3.0 to 2.7 (n.s.). The mean interview time significantly increased from the first to the second interview, but the increase in the interview duration and the change of the overall score for the students’ communication skills were not correlated (Pearson’s r?=?0.03; n.s.).Our communication course measurably improved communication skills, especially for female students. These improvements did not depend predominantly on an extension of the interview time. Obviously, “technical” aspects of communication can be taught better than “emotional” communication skills.It is widely accepted that physicians require good history taking and communication skills [1]. They are particularly important in primary care settings where diagnoses often may be obtained by an attentive history taking alone. Moreover, patient outcomes such as drug adherence, patient satisfaction and coping with illness depend, amongst others, on the doctor’s communication abilities [1-7]. As history taking and communication with patients are frequent and essential tasks, these skills should be taught early and repeatedly throughout medical education with the support of simulated patients (SP), combined with structured feedback. They should be taught more in a problem-based method (“experimental”) than with instructional teaching methods [6-12].Although it is taken
|