Contributions of a blended learning based on peer evaluation for teaching drug-drug interactions to undergraduate pharmacy students.


Journal

BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 Nov 2019
Historique:
received: 08 04 2019
accepted: 05 11 2019
entrez: 21 11 2019
pubmed: 21 11 2019
medline: 4 4 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Numerous studies have pointed out the need for better training of healthcare professionals in drug-drug interactions management in order to minimize adverse drugs reactions impacts on patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefits of a blended learning strategy based on peer evaluation (PE) for teaching drug-drug interactions to undergraduate pharmacy students. Third-year pharmacy students (n = 72) from the University of Limoges were involved in a hybrid teaching using the Moodle platform (2.9 version). After the theoretical lectures, an online activity was proposed to students. Each student submitted a report addressing a clinical case for peer evaluation. Students evaluated the pedagogical approach using an online survey. Quantitative benefits were assessed from students randomly assigned into two groups: PE in pharmacodynamics items (PE-PD) or PE in pharmacokinetics items (PE-PK). During this activity, three marks were given: one from peers for their evaluation work and two from teachers for oral group presentation of the clinical cases and for the final written examination. Statistics were performed using two-tailed unpaired t-test and significance was set for p < 0.05. Only a few students (n = 14, 20.6%) were aware of the peer evaluation principle and even less, only one student (n = 1, 1.5%), had already encountered it. Students considered that they benefited from this evaluation (n = 65, 95.6%); from their work being reviewed (n = 62, 91.2%) and that they participated in improving their classmates understanding (n = 59, 86.8%). Peers' allocated marks were similar in the two PE groups (PE-PD = 17.4 ± 1.4; PE-PK = 17.3 ± 1.4). Teachers' marks for oral presentation were significantly lower for pharmacodynamics than for pharmacokinetics items (PE-PD = 15.2 ± 1.2; PE-PK = 16.1 ± 2.1; p < 0.05). The final examination marks were equivalent in both groups (PE-PD = 11.0 ± 2.1; PE-PK = 11.2 ± 1.9). Besides the fact that a major short-term quantitative improvement was not detected, our teaching approach was qualified as being a positive and stimulating learning tool by students.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Numerous studies have pointed out the need for better training of healthcare professionals in drug-drug interactions management in order to minimize adverse drugs reactions impacts on patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefits of a blended learning strategy based on peer evaluation (PE) for teaching drug-drug interactions to undergraduate pharmacy students.
METHODS METHODS
Third-year pharmacy students (n = 72) from the University of Limoges were involved in a hybrid teaching using the Moodle platform (2.9 version). After the theoretical lectures, an online activity was proposed to students. Each student submitted a report addressing a clinical case for peer evaluation. Students evaluated the pedagogical approach using an online survey. Quantitative benefits were assessed from students randomly assigned into two groups: PE in pharmacodynamics items (PE-PD) or PE in pharmacokinetics items (PE-PK). During this activity, three marks were given: one from peers for their evaluation work and two from teachers for oral group presentation of the clinical cases and for the final written examination. Statistics were performed using two-tailed unpaired t-test and significance was set for p < 0.05.
RESULTS RESULTS
Only a few students (n = 14, 20.6%) were aware of the peer evaluation principle and even less, only one student (n = 1, 1.5%), had already encountered it. Students considered that they benefited from this evaluation (n = 65, 95.6%); from their work being reviewed (n = 62, 91.2%) and that they participated in improving their classmates understanding (n = 59, 86.8%). Peers' allocated marks were similar in the two PE groups (PE-PD = 17.4 ± 1.4; PE-PK = 17.3 ± 1.4). Teachers' marks for oral presentation were significantly lower for pharmacodynamics than for pharmacokinetics items (PE-PD = 15.2 ± 1.2; PE-PK = 16.1 ± 2.1; p < 0.05). The final examination marks were equivalent in both groups (PE-PD = 11.0 ± 2.1; PE-PK = 11.2 ± 1.9).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Besides the fact that a major short-term quantitative improvement was not detected, our teaching approach was qualified as being a positive and stimulating learning tool by students.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31744484
doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1867-5
pii: 10.1186/s12909-019-1867-5
pmc: PMC6862800
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

426

Références

Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Oct;74(10):1235-1248
pubmed: 29926135
Am J Pharm Educ. 2010 Jun 15;74(5):null
pubmed: 20798797
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Jul;73(7):891-899
pubmed: 28314882
JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1323-9
pubmed: 2406470
Trends Biotechnol. 2002 Aug;20(8):357-8
pubmed: 12127284
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Mar 11;14:47
pubmed: 24612923
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Aug 23;19(1):321
pubmed: 31443705
JAMA. 1993 Apr 7;269(13):1655-60
pubmed: 8240483
Med Educ. 2006 Oct;40(10):965-72
pubmed: 16987186
Implement Sci. 2014 May 06;9:54
pubmed: 24885925
JAMA. 1998 Apr 15;279(15):1200-5
pubmed: 9555760

Auteurs

Roland Lawson (R)

Département de pharmacologie, Univ. Limoges, Faculté de Pharmacie, Inserm U1248, F-87000, Limoges, France. roland-fabrice.lawson@unilim.fr.
Faculté de Pharmacie, Université de Limoges, 2 rue du Dr Marcland, 87025, Limoges, France. roland-fabrice.lawson@unilim.fr.

Hélène Géniaux (H)

CHU Limoges, Centre régional de pharmacovigilance, de pharmaco-épidémiologie et d'information sur les médicaments, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Serge Bailly (S)

Service commun d'ingénierie pédagogique (UL Community), University of Limoges, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Christelle Pouget (C)

Département de chimie organique et thérapeutique, , Faculté de Pharmacie, University of Limoges, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Catherine Fagnère (C)

Département de chimie organique et thérapeutique, , Faculté de Pharmacie, University of Limoges, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Marie-Laure Laroche (ML)

CHU Limoges, Centre régional de pharmacovigilance, de pharmaco-épidémiologie et d'information sur les médicaments, F-87000, Limoges, France.
Département de pharmacologie, Faculté de Médecine, University of Limoges, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Jacques Monteil (J)

Département Universitaire d'Enseignement Numérique en Santé (DUENES), Faculté de Médecine, University of Limoges, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Jean-Jacques Moreau (JJ)

Département Universitaire d'Enseignement Numérique en Santé (DUENES), Faculté de Médecine, University of Limoges, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Nicolas Picard (N)

Département de pharmacologie, Univ. Limoges, Faculté de Pharmacie, Inserm U1248, F-87000, Limoges, France.
Département Universitaire d'Enseignement Numérique en Santé (DUENES), Faculté de Médecine, University of Limoges, F-87000, Limoges, France.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH