Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design, implementation and prospective evaluation of a new interactive musculoskeletal module for medical students in Ireland

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

We designed, implemented and assessed an interactive musculoskeletal teaching module for fourth-year medical students. Over a 2-week period, students followed a programme of alternating lectures, interactive tutorials, case discussions, clinical examination and ‘how to do’ sessions using patients and clinical models.

Methods

Over a 4-month period, 140 fourth-year medical students rotated for 2 weeks through a new interactive musculoskeletal teaching module in an elective orthopaedic hospital. To assess the impact of our module, a basic-competency examination in musculoskeletal medicine was developed and validated. Each student completed the examination on the first and last days of the module. We also assessed musculoskeletal basic knowledge in students from a different medical school, receiving a classic lecturing programme.

Results

In the pre-course assessment, only 20 % of students achieved an overall pass rate. The pass rate increased to 85 % in post-course examination. Students found particularly beneficial the interactive tutorial approach, with 48 % finding this to be the single most effective teaching method. When compared with students who completed a classic lecturing programme, students attending our interactive module scored higher in all aspects of musculoskeletal knowledge.

Significance

This study highlights the benefits and need for more interactive teaching of musculoskeletal medicine in medical schools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yelin E, Herrndorf A, Trupin L, Sonneborn D (2001) A national study of medical care expenditures for musculoskeletal conditions: the impact of health insurance and managed care. Arthritis Rheum 44:1160–1169

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Carr AJ, Harnden A (1997) Orthopaedics in primary care. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  3. De Lorenzo RA, Mayer D, Geehr EC (1990) Analyzing clinical case distributions to improve an emergency medicine clerkship. Ann Emerg Med 19:746–751

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Freedman KB, Bernstein J (1998) The adequacy of medical school education in musculoskeletal medicine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80-A:1421–1427

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kahl LE (1987) Musculoskeletal problems in the family practice setting: guidelines for curriculum design. J Rheumatol 14:811–814

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Marsland DW, Wood M, Mayo F (1976) Content of family practice. Part I. Rank order of diagnoses by frequency. Part II. Diagnoses by disease category and age/sex distribution. J Fam Pract 3:37–68

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Mulhall KJ, Masterson E (2005) Relating undergraduate musculoskeletal medicine curricula to the needs of modern practice. Ir J Med Sci 174:46–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Pinney SJ, Regan WD (2001) Educating medical students about musculoskeletal problems. Are community needs reflected in the curricula of Canadian medical schools? J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A:1317–1320

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Williams JR (2000) The teaching of trauma and orthopaedic surgery to the undergraduate in the United Kingdom. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82:627–628

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bernstein J, Alonso DR, DiCaprio M et al (2003) Curricular reform in musculoskeletal medicine: needs, opportunities, and solutions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 415:302–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. DiCaprio MR, Covey A, Bernstein J (2003) Curricular requirements for musculoskeletal medicine in American medical schools. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A:565–567

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Craton N, Matheson GO (1993) Training and clinical competency in musculoskeletal medicine. Identifying the problem. Sports Med 15:328–337

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Booth A, Wise DI (1990) General practice training in musculoskeletal disorders. Br J Gen Pract 40:390

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Reznick RK, Brewer ML, Wesley RM, Stauffer ES (1987) Orthopaedic teaching: the practicing family doctor’s perspective. Orthop Rev 16:529–535

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Editorial Guest (1998) The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010. Acta Orthop Scand 69:219–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Reznick RK, MacRae H (2006) Teaching surgical skills—changes in the wind. N Engl J Med 355:2664–2669

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hill D, Stalley P, Pennington D et al (1997) Competency-based learning in traumatology. Am J Surg 173:136–140

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bilderback K, Eggerstedt J, Sadasivan KK, Seelig L, Wolf R, Barton S, McCall R, Chesson AL Jr, Marino AA (2008) Design and implementation of a system-based course in musculoskeletal medicine for medical students. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(10):2292–2300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Day CS, Yu YR, Yeh AC, Newman LR, Arky R, Roberts DH (2009) Musculoskeletal preclinical medical school education: meeting an underserved need. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(3):733–739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Freedman KB, Bernstein J (2002) Educational deficiencies in musculoskeletal medicine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84:604–608

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Matzkin E, Smith EL, Freccero D, Richardson AB (2005) Adequacy of education in musculoskeletal medicine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:310–314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Stockard AR, Allen TW (2006) Competence levels in musculoskeletal medicine: comparison of osteopathic and allopathic medical graduates. J Am Osteopath Assoc 106:350–355

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

All authors state that there is no conflict of interest in the submitted manuscript; there are no financial and personal relationships with other people or organisations that could inappropriately influence (bias) the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Royal College of Surgeons, 123 Stephen Green, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland

    M. H. Vioreanu, B. J. O’Daly, M. J. Shelly, B. M. Devitt & J. M. O’Byrne

  2. Professorial Unit, Cappagh National Orthopaedic Hospital, Finglas, Dublin 11, Ireland

    M. H. Vioreanu

Authors
  1. M. H. Vioreanu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B. J. O’Daly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. J. Shelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B. M. Devitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. M. O’Byrne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. H. Vioreanu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vioreanu, M.H., O’Daly, B.J., Shelly, M.J. et al. Design, implementation and prospective evaluation of a new interactive musculoskeletal module for medical students in Ireland. Ir J Med Sci 182, 191–199 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-012-0855-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-012-0855-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation