Evaluating the educational effectiveness of a structured, simulator-assisted, peer-led training on cardiovascular physical examination in third-year medical students: A randomized, controlled trial

<p class="AbstractCxSpFirst"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><b>Background:</b> Previous research suggests that cardiac examination skills in undergraduate medical students frequently need improvement. There are different ways to enhance physical examination (PE) skills such as simulator-based training or peer-assisted learning (PAL). </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p class="AbstractCxSpMiddle"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><b>Aim:</b> The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a structured, simulator-assisted, peer-led training on cardiovascular PE.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p class="AbstractCxSpMiddle"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><b>Methods:</b> Participants were third-year medical students at Leipzig University Faculty of Medicine. Students were randomly assigned to an intervention group (IG) and a control group (CG). In addition to standard curricular training, IG received a peer-led, simulator-based training in cardiac PE. Participant performance in cardiac PE was assessed using a standardized checklist with a maximum of 25 points. Primary outcome was assessed via checklist point distribution.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p class="AbstractCxSpMiddle"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><b>Results:</b> 89 students were randomised to either CG (<i>n</i> = 43) or IG (<i>n</i> = 46) with 70 completing the study. Overall, IG students performed significantly better than CG students did (max. points: 25, IG M ± SD in IG was 17 ± 3, in CG 12 ± 4, p &lt; .0001). Simple mistakes such as not using the stethoscope correctly were more frequent in CG students. Prior experience did not lead to a significant difference in performance. </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p class="Abstract"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><span><b>Conclusions:</b> Structured, peer-led and simulator-assisted teaching sessions improve cardiac PE skills in this setting compared to control students that did not receive this training.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>